Quote me, solo - where exactly is my acrimonious vilification? And who are YOU to be judging my opinion? ;-) And yes, you are damn right it's meant as an insult to the viewer. If 200-300 people can be bothered to click on a picture solely because it has a bit of T&A, then they should be equally as enthusiastic about other pictures that don't. Now, I'm not talking about a difference of 20 or 30 hits - I'm talking about MULTIPLICATIONS of 20 or 30 hits. I find yours to be a very vindictive reply. Without knowing me you insult my freedom of thought ("...who are you to be judging..."), my intelligence ("...maybe you don't understand...") my freedom of speech ("...that doesn't give you the right...") and my knowledge of the English language. Without even resorting to the dictionary I think you'll find a voyeur is someone who gets sexual gratification from looking at something. Someone who is just looking at something is a VIEWER. If you get turned on my buildings, landscapes, flowers... hey, whatever your scene! ;) Solo, if you would be open and willing enough to skip back about the 4 years I've been here (or the last couple of days!) you'll find me to be an easy going, often humourous and generally well liked kind of guy. I TOTALLY understand human nature, but would like people to be intelligent enough to overcome animal urges and look at other pictures that often take more planning / knowledge / luck than nudes. I also understand that it's easy to be aggressive towards someone you don't know, and how easy it is to misinterpret them purely from text. Now, stop, shakes hands and play nicely with me :-D I'm sure Cyn can tell you the bit to do next..... ;-) (",)