Riddokun:

when shown how hard it was to track pedophils down... the "known" and reported cases number grown by something like 300% at least !

===============

The "nudity flag" is not an anti-adult porn, anti-pedophile or ant-job losing cind of thing alone. It's a rule which was created, I assume, based on a number of concerns (including all of the above and probably more).

I'm often astounded at the lengths peopel will go to APPARENTLY to attack this simple rule of courtesy. The rule does not prevent nudity from being psoted - post away! It is an enabler - it enables people to avoid a (rather broadly defined) specific type of image that FOR WHATEVER REASON they don't want to see. It sometiems seems like specific reasons for not wanting nudity to pop up on ones screen are being attacked in order to belittle those reasons and, eventually, the rule.

My apologies for this post, but Riddokun's post above hit a raw nerve that's been tingling during this thread. To start with, let me please state that if it's so hard to find out about these pedophiles then why has the detection rate increasd by "300%"? That seems to be somewhat contradictory. It could be, perhaps, that such disgusting behaviur is on the increase. Given the nature of technology I'd say it probably has - but to that degree? May I submit that contrary to snide and/or thoughtless comments that the detection and/or reporting rate has been increasing?

You see - there always have been a great number of sickos out there, but many of their victims have seriously been unaware that they were victims, or too ashamed to admit to what happened. I knew someone who suffered abuse as a child, and I saw them suffer agonies for months once they'd decided, as an adult, to report it. It's had a lasting affect on them, but judging by the last time we discussed it the fact that they "came out" and took it to court (and won) has been a tremendous vindication and boost to that person, and wouldn't have come about if our society hadn't started to try and make it clear that the law says such behaviour is untenable.

To belittle the attempts that have been made to make people more aware of pedophilia is, to me, disgusting. To use such an offensive attitude in an attack on a rule on a web site to limit images from appearing if the viewer so chooses seems to me to be totally inappropriate. I can't put myself inside the head of someone who has themselves suffered - I'm not imaginative enough. But I have seen at least some of the distress that it's caused, and some after-effects many years after the fact. I can't imagine how anyone who has been affected personally by sexual assault feels whenever attempts at "PG" morality are ridiculed, but I don't imagine they make them feel any better.

Laws, rules, guidelines are generally created by (or based on) mass agreement. "Morality" is variable, for example - the mores of the day depend on the civilisation of the day, there is no fixed "good" or "bad" per se. At the moment ON BALANCE it's felt that allowing people to not view nudity on Rendersity, if that's what they wish, is a good thing. Is it SO terribly wrong for artists/brokers to shy away from suggestions of pedophilia if they want to? Should they or civilisation REALLY be criticised for trying to draw a line, however arbitrarily? Is it REALLY "sad" or "terrible" if someone feels that they should censor the undeveloped sexual body parts of a model designed to appear childlike? Why? Who does it REALLY hurt? Can you, for example, only judge the quality of a texture by the nipples?

Sorry for going on, it's just that I can't shake Renderosity by the shoulders and shout "WAKE UP".

I have one child. He often sees me posing naked dragons and dinosaurs. As it happens Poser starts up with the wooden mannequin, but that's only because it's a light character that I fancied on the day I set the default up. I'd imagine he's seen Posette and Victoria2 naked various times, but not so much that he's ever mentioned it. I don't think nudity is automaticlaly bad by any stretch, but I think if peopel don't want to see it (or voilence for that matter) then they have a perfect right not to. That R'Osity makes it possible to avoid nudity in forums and gallerie s(and I assume the marketplace) seems to me to be only sensible. For reference, I allow adult images on Renderosity at present (this may change as my sone gets older, or it may not). I wouldn't dream of allowing naked or violent images to show up when at a clients site, however (my nearest equivalent to "at work" where there may be anti-nudity rules if one wishes to remain employed).

Cheers,

Cliff