the following is a quote of a quote from the below thread. "Effective immediately Renderosity will no longer broker the following types of products: 1) Poses or activity were any person (regardless of age) appears that they "could" be engaged in sexual activity. 2) Items that appear "sexual in nature" or are intended for "adult audiences" (example: bondage gear)." is this a misquote (genuinely asking, i haven't seen the original)? if not, then pulling "items that appear 'sexual in nature'" is a lot more significant than having to pull a few thumbnails. that could include practically all but a few clothing outfits (like all of bat's stuff but 2 outfits, all underwear, most of as shanim's, even wusumah's clothes that have morphs exposing the body, almost all of the armor ever marketed). could is he opperative word here, i realize, but it's still worrisome. from what i've heard about pay pal and porn (people who have said their accounts have been frozen and for what), i don't think burying a picture 1 click deep is going to stop them from freezing accounts. i think they're finding it a significant source of income from how many people have mentioned it happening to them and from how little nudity was involved (philc's site? come on, now). i really mainly like the everyday, realistic items here, and some of the fantasy stuff that would actually work. but that does include realistic underwear. and i really like a lot of awful soul stuff. i guess what i'm saying is, i'm a big fan of using poser for more than yet another nviatws or pinup, and i'm concerned. if the above is correct and accurate, then i don't think the language of this announcement has produced a reaction out of proportion with its implication.