As a point of fact, I did reply to the person who emailed me initially about the deletion. I made my post to the forum not long after replying directly to that person. To be clear, and in contrary to what ScottA suggested, I did not open this thread to rally supporters in the hopes of generating any collective pressure. And for the record, I have yet to get any reply from the moderator to whom I did directly reply initially, although I have heard from SndCastie (to whom I thank for that). My intent was to create discussion on the matter based on the merits of the situation. In my view, staying on the right side of a boundary is allowed, no matter how close to that boundary I might elect to get. I realize the disagreement is whether or not I crossed over that boundary. I maintain that I did not. But to the extent that there is room to consider the boundary itself, I felt the matter warranted some public discussion. I am quite mindful of the boundary in this case. I have previously created images that I know are easily on the other side of it. I post those images elsewhere. But when I feel that I am on the right side of the boundary, I object to being censored. The fact that a vote was taken indicates to me that there was enough ambiguity to merit discussion and possible debate among the moderators. Given that case, I feel my work deserved the benefit of the doubt in this case. Clearly, others disagree. And while I agree with Jackson's analogy, I wonder if it's apt enough in this case. Artists are encouraged to list credits for all Renderosity products purchased that were used in the artwork. This is more akin to selling someone lingerie, inviting them to model it for marketing purposes, then calling the cops for doing so. As soon as I am back at my home computer, I will forward copies of the image to those who have asked to see it. Whether or not you agree with me on this particular question, the appropriate interpretation of the TOS rules is a subject worthy of conversation.