I do have to say one thing...Pushingfaders thank you though. you so far have been the only one to actually address the situation. and not in a "STOP IT OR YOULL GET LOCKED DELETED OR WARNED ON YOUR MEMBER RECORD" type of deal but in an actual way of discussing it. to that Thank you. it said implied sexual situations. sorry touching another womans rear end is sexual situations unless you are a doctor or the lady that does her waxing. I am a woman...trust me we do not go around in shear nighties rubing rumps with each other. {I know gentlemen the porn movies lied we are not all doing that behind closed doors} does the particular picture offend me HECK NO. it is a beautiful picture BUT you can not tell me that it is not an implied sexual situation. ~rubs her head~ there needs to be an actual clear guidline. and one that is adhered too for ALL artists and ALL pictures for the gallery. that is what we are asking for. sexual situation...ok that apparently doesnt include nudity or woman et woman touching fawning gropeing man handling or caressing each other...it DOES include a mans hand near his own pee pee. {sorry from what I have seen men seem to have their hand in the general area for other things then masterbation, the most common from my friends words is to " shift" ~cringes~ would that be implied?} it doesnt make sence. consistancy ....for every picture.

I don't doubt for a second that some folks have offered to help out. I can't comment about your image that you removed or what Dee said to you.. I just wasn't there.. There are sections of the TOS that leave room for interpretation... Any "law" will be seen differently by different people, I'm sure you understand this. I totally agree that the the TOS should be dealt with consistantly. Sexual scenes in and of them selves are not against the TOS... I'll do the best I can to help you folks out... Feel free to contact me anytime.. I'm not blowing you off, but I do have some "other" things to attend to here... I'll check back on this thread in the AM Thanks for taking the time to listen to me.. Bruce

Bruce,

Up until you started posting I do not believe it was common knowledge that this area currently does not have a full time mod (I certainly did not know). There are 2 mods and 5 coordinators listed at the top of the page. That gives the appearance that people are "on the job" so to speak.

As I have repeatedly said I don't care either way whether the pictures stay or go. I don't find any of them personally offensive and most of them were quite well done, IMO. The point I and I think a few others are trying to make is the uneven handling of situations.

As far as Dialyn, I do not care whether she is a member or a mod or the site owner. I don't care for what I feel like is an intentional mudding of the waters. That is my right. If I leave it certainly won't be only because of her post.

There are two distinct issues as I see them.

One being the uneven handling of the TOS. That is the one that I personally have issue with.

The other being that people will complain about things they find personally offensive to them and that is what I think Dialyn is addressing, but she is doing it in such a way as to try and confuse the two issues, IMO.

I haven't seen anything here (yet) that I find personally offensive. I don't have a problem with nudity, bondage, fetish gear, same sex relationships etc. I am an adult. If I don't like something I certainly realize that I am free simply not to click on the image or thread that might contain something that does not interest me.

I am not so presumptous to assume that just because it is something I do not wish to view I should tell others that they are not free to view it if they so choose.

I expect to see a certain amount of nudity at this or any other related site. The models don't come fully clothed so it makes sense there is going to be a certain amount of nudity when people ask questions about different problems they have etc. In the galleries I certainly expect to see quite a lot of nudity. If it bothered me I would filter or simply not look at those images which might offend my sensablities.

That is a completely seperate issue than the one I and others are addressing, IMO and I wish people would stop trying to make them the same one because they are not.

I would like to thank you for stepping up and trying to help this forum when it sounds like you have a lot on your plate already. It seems that at least one coordinator has time to make snide remarks and lock threads down rather than stepping up and address the issues in the forum that he is supposed to be moderating. If, instead, he had come forward and made a statement that there was currently no mod for this forum or that matters were being looked into that would likely have gone a ways toward diffusing the situations.

Thank you again for taking time to actually address my specific post vs just trying to sweep what I have said under the rug like it was never said.

Towal

Please note that that specific section of the TOS has been changed to read " no implied sexual acts" I hope that helps

Thank you Bruce I know I do appreciate your efforts.

Again from the TOS:
No Explicit sexual content [No manipulation of breasts/nipples/ no sexual situations/ no implied sexual acts/ no extreme or explicit S&M bondage situations/ no lewd or obscene sexual references]

I can tell you that as I said before I do not hang out with my female (or male) friends naked or scantily clad with them touching my breasts or rear and consider that a normal daily activity. You can't say that it's not a sexual situation to have 2 naked people touching each others "private" parts. Thomas said straight out that touching anothers "parts" was likely to get us right back here, yet when I posted several images showing exactly that instead of addressing what he said (when I even specifically asked) he locked the thread for being Off Topic.

You said "Sexual scenes in and of them selves are not against the TOS..." Ok great! Reading the TOS that honestly doesn't seem to be the case. Can you please give an example of a sexual scene that would be allowed aside from a picture in which the 2 or more models just happen to be naked? I know nudity is allowed, but that is different than a sexual scene, at least IMO.

I want to thank you again for responding to this thread in a rational manner and actually trying to resolve it and let us know that our opinions are actually being considered vs just swept away.

Towal

...to keep my mouth shut. Didn't work, obviously. First, I don't think there's much of a problem with singling out gay images or links. Maybe a small one, but more from hair trigger firing than anything else. If someone brings any picture to the mods, it'll be reviewed for TOS violation. Second, the problem is with the uneven, shoot from the hip aspect that seems to have started. I had a message deleted because I mentioned that a freebie was going to be at a specific site, that is age restricted. I gave the site by name, but not a link to the site. The mod first made a mistake and moved the thread from the Poser forum to the Product Showcase. When I pointed out that it was a freebie, and had said so in the post, the mere mention of the age restricted site got the thread deleted. Why the mod didn't catch the supposed TOS violation in her review of the original post (she missed freestuff, too, remember) is beyond me. I then pulled my other freestuff, all of which had a readme that mentioned the restricted site. Now, when I posted a thread that I was taking a hiatus from active posting and had pulled my freestuff, there was some speculation by members as to why. I got a number of emails asking. The mods stepped in and tried to justify their decision. That made matters worse. The thread mentioned not only the site that I had my original post, it mentioned other adult sites. That thread was eventually locked by the mod who had made the initial mistake/decision. It's still there though. Other threads have mentioned the same sites, but they're all still there. Why was mine deleted and no one elses? Because of a shoot from the hip, react quick, think later attitude. Most of the mods are new, and don't have the experience (or sometimes the common sense), a more seasoned mod would. What's the solution? Well, the 'sity is a business. If they PO a lot of their membership, sales will go down, freestuff will move to other sites, and they'll make less money. Not from any boycott, but because people get fed up with the inconsistancy. Some of the best vendors have left to greener pastures, the best mod is now at a competitor, and I don't spend nearly as much money here as I used to. If the 'sity wants to stay in business, they should get their act together. They are an age restriced site themselves, catering to people who are creative, and tend to be more openminded. It's time for the 'sity to grow up. The people who spend money are adults, and want to be treated like adults. I'll shut up again. I'll try to be quiet in the future.

The coords are learning.. just as I did when I became a mod...I'm still learning.. As far as how the TOS is applied, try to work with me on this... Most TOS images fall into two category's as far as I see them.. The ones that are BLATANT TOS issues, sometimes by intent, sometimes by ignorance. Then there is the gray areas.. Here's a good example the TOS says "no extreme or explicit S&M bondage situations" what do you consider extreme? What do I consider extreme? It doesn't say bondage isn't allowed... This is where there is a gray area... I understand your point... They are NOT the same issue OK, now I'm really going to check my conterst and call it a night... :-) I'll check back tomorrow.. Bruce "pushinfaders"

Bruce,

Thank you again for hanging in there ;) I can't answer your question on what I might consider an extreme bondage pose because I haven't seen any here. I don't find bondage in and of itself disturbing as long as it's 2 (or more) consenting people. I suspect that a bondage scene might not have as much in the "grey" area as some of this other stuff simply because of the nature of the topic.

2 people being naked and near each other would give most people the illusion that something sexual is going to happen, just happened or might happen. Again, I don't care, but I think a little more direction on what is or is not ok would go a long way toward resolving this type of arguement.

If we look at it realistically people doing NVIATWAS are most likely doing it for the sexual aspect vs some great adoration of the human body. I do nudes/scantily clad women/provocative posed models etc, but I don't post them here because I want my non nude stuff to get a few viewings ;) Mostly I do them because I have fun dressing the models up...interactive Barbie of sorts. A learn a lot from doing that type of render that I can then apply to what I consider more "serious" work.

I'm not saying people who do nudes are not artists or are a lesser grade of artist. I have seen some beautiful nudes in the galleries (one of my favorite images is a nude waves at April). I am speaking for me personally that I don't consider my doing them serious. I do them for fun and to play around. That may change in the future after I have had the program for longer and am more experienced.

I am more than happy to simply skip images or threads that do not interest me. I do not want to only have images that I find appealing in the galleries..how boring that would be. That is a different issue than what I am trying to address with the TOS thing.

See you tomorrow (hopefully no one locks this in the meantime)

Towal

Did he??? That must have been a bit humiliating! :) He must have been wearing his "too tight boxers" or something!! Geez!! Fortunately I telecommute.....and more fortunate still....I'm the boss!! :)

better print this out too, before they lock it down too.

UGH my life for an edit button! my boss is a woman not a man. I am a hetero male. Made me unconfortable viewing a picture with a man holding his crotch and have someone over my shoulder make comments to me. It's not what I come here for, and didn't expect that in the forum so I was caught off guard.

Feel free to print this...This thread isn't about to be locked down.. We are have a calm and rational discussion Sarge. Bruce "pushifaders" Renderosity Moderator

You've been a breath of fresh air, pushinfaders. So nice to have a discussion without threats of lockdowns and warnings thrown about. :) It would actually be very hard to offend me when it comes to images in the gallery etc. I don't mind nudity or sexuality or bondage etc, so I don't have issues with the actual images. If I did, that's what the nudity tag is for. It's just what appears to be an uneven application of the TOS and a few trigger happy official folks here that cause me issues. ;) I won't bug you about the copyright stuff, I know that's really not your call.

Ha Ha Caly, I was afraid you were gonna ask me about your copyright issues... I don't have a clue about that stuff, nor the market place... :-) When I get some time later, I'll try to address some the issues we are discussing here.. There is no need for this thread to be locked. Well, as long as we stay away from personal attacks and B.S. like that.. Bruce

Can we steal you Bruce and keep you here in the poser forum???????? please???? pretty please???

Yay Bruce! :)

Hi Guys... & Ladies, just for the record, I had no intention of locking this thread either, unless it resulted in personal attacks. Bruce, thanks for your time & efforts. Thomas Poser Coordinator

Attached Link: http://www.renderosity.com/viewed.ez?galleryid=566121&Start=37&Sectionid=1&filter_genre_id=4&WhatsN

We were discussing applying the TOS. The image I've linked to is a good example.. (no offense to the author).. Would you consider this a TOS issue? I think it could be taken either way... pretend your a Mod or a Coord for a minute. Read the TOS, and try to apply it to this image. One could say it fell into this category "No manipulation of breasts/nipples/ no sexual situations" Is it really manipulation? is the nipple actually being touched? or would you prefer the "no sexual situations" ? That's a pretty broad area. Bear with me a minute on this one, Unless you make a TOS that doesn't allow ANY Nudity, or anything even remotely sexual...You will have gray areas.. If the TOS were more explict in it's descriptions,more black and white lets say, Then you will always have someone trying to see how far they can push it. One example is the " no implied sexual acts" It used to read no sexual acts, period. Some then some started posting images where it was obvious, that it was a sexual act,but they his the penetration with shadows or a piece of cloth or something.. Thus the implied clause.. On things being applied fairly.. I said it previously, yes, by all means.It should be done fairly. Images will however, fall thru the cracks.. unless there was a small army of Coords and mods here 24/7, it's going to happen.. There will always be images that some feel should be removed, while others don't. I'll be curious to hear different opinions on the link I provided. Bruce

God I need an edit button. One, thank you Bruce for once more handling this so well. now, the picture in question actually is one of my favorites. very well made and very well lit. but this is the problem. it is not the TOS that is the problem it is the fact it is not being consistantly handled. if you let in one pic with touching...why not the others? touching a breast is touching. sexual or not. so why is it ok to touch a breast but not a pee pee. the pee pee in question was not erect..and actually the peepee was not being touched. it looked like is MIGHT OF COULD OF BEEN touching. but wasnt touching. but it was pulled due to that. to me that is not a gray area. touching is touching. Do I want all nudes gone? do I want erotic sexual pictures stoped...NO WAY!!!!!!! I cut my teeth on olivia and the old candyfloss comics in penthouse...I adore that type of work. I adore -doing- erotic art. I adore doing nudes. BUT there needs to be consistancy in applying the TOS. If touching a breast is ok then it should of been ok to allow malories picture in as it was NOT touching any genitals. that is why we are upset. I mean you say it is gray but it is not. I used the situation of my pic being asked to be removed{again a thanks to Dee as she handled it with respect and kindness I think I would do near anything she requested as she does it with respect} it was geting flack not for touching...not for sexual situation but because the privates looked TOO real. That to me is not a gray area. why was it geting flack? I mean seriously it didnt violate the TOS at all. if a viewer is having problems. as long as the pic is not flat out intercouse or such. then hold the viewer to some responsablity as well. most of us that do erotic or nudes not only hit the nudity flag but warn of the nudity in the title. if we are going to allow breast touching then what is wrong with male erotic art? the pic in question....there was no gential contact. It was a beautiful picture. breasts are ok but penis arent? no I can not accept that. if there IS a gray area...then why not work out a TOS that is not gray. make it clear. make it fair and make it consistant. If you ban nudes or sexual heated pics..or erotic work you wont have much of a gallery at all. so with that in mind. instaed of making it with an iron fist...make it so the artists can post pics with in reason. no not intercouse not sexual acts that are clear as day. nudity is not wrong. sexual tense situations are not wrong. erotic is not wrong. specially as you are talking about adults here. you can not use the excuse of underagers for they can go to the market place and see far far faaar worse. Make it so that the artists have abit more breathing room.

"so why is it ok to touch a breast but not a pee pee" breasts are ok but penis arent? One simple word Genitalia. The TOS says "No Genital contact with ANY object, other than sitting or clothing. " There is nothing wrong with male etoric art.. I'm kinda at a loss for words right now. I don't see a difference between touching a male breast or a female breast. I'm all for the TOS being applied fairly and evenly.. I understand the issues,but, I just don't have an answer..

thank you again trust me it is greatly appreciated that you have taken the time to answer all this...sorry

Sorry, I'm just kinda burned out...

I give up. Thank you Bruce for wading into the fray :)

Towal

I don't know why I have wasted my time on this thread. So here is my thoughts on the whole thing. Renderosity is taking the same policy as the Movie Industry. You don't see a guy playing with his dick on camera unless the film gets NC-17. Women touching other womens breast in movies get R Rating. Part of the reason there are federal laws.

"Renderosity is taking the same policy as the Movie Industry." You know, you could be on to something. Though federal law has nothing to do with it. The movie industry polices itself. And filmmakers are always complaining that they have no idea why one film gets an NC-17 while another gets an R. It's all subjective, and often, they aren't even given any hints about how to fix it. They just have to keep re-editing and submitting their movies until they get the rating they want. However, it might be helpful if we knew what MPAA "rating" Renderosity was supposed to have. Even PG movies have "sexual acts," so is this site supposed to be G-rated? That's the kiss of death for even a Disney movie these days, so I suspect not. Is it supposed to be R-rated? That's not what I call a family-friendly site. But IMO, that makes more sense for an artistic site, not to mention one selling S&M gear in the MP. But in that case, I would expect, to use DarkElegance's phrase, "more breathing room" for the artists. Honestly, I don't think Melory's image would be more than R-rated. As an example, "Oz," the HBO prison drama, featured far more explicit scenes (yes, including male nudity and m/m sex), and it got a TM-MA rating, which I think is the equivalent of an R. But it certainly was not porn. And it's not against "federal law."

Arrghh. That's supposed to be "TV-MA" rating.

SargeBear you rule, Keep up the good work.

But one think you need to know SargeBear, Renderosity may want to limit the male sex organ to make the site appear straight friendly. Im sure there are a alot of complaints fromt he straight members moaning a complaining about the gay images including some women who are disturbed by it as well, I noticed some women have a problem weith it as well. I say screw them, there always the pengin bar or the gay poser site, why stay where were not wanted we can always take are stores someplace else and they lose the gay dollar.

I also noticed the script here sucks, it likes to put letters in typed sentences where they don't belong because the script buffer can't keep up with 60 words a minute.

Just as a point of information, I'm a woman....I'm not offended by gay art or gay people....male or female. I don't know the best way to deal with this. All I know is that if their's a tag that says "nudity" or "sexually explicit", I can read and will stay away if I don't want to see it. Some sites have a special spot for art that is sexually explicit and you have to log on to see it....fill out a form....etc. Maybe that's a way to deal with it. I do know this.....some of the most creative people in the world are gay as well as some of the smartest :) For me it's a non-issue....but that's just me :) I just wish we could stop getting hung up on silly stuff like this.....too many real problems in the world to concern ourselves with.