Wed, Sep 25, 9:30 AM CDT

Renderosity Forums / Poser - OFFICIAL



Welcome to the Poser - OFFICIAL Forum

Forum Coordinators: RedPhantom

Poser - OFFICIAL F.A.Q (Last Updated: 2024 Sep 25 9:18 am)



Subject: Change in TOS...New Child Image Guidelines


Byrdie ( ) posted Mon, 21 March 2005 at 5:21 PM

::licks cream off fingers:: Oooh! Chocolate! And if there's an "No Cross Dressing" clause in the TOS, I'll sic the nearest LGBT anti-defamation league on whomsoever's responsible. :-p


markk ( ) posted Mon, 21 March 2005 at 5:23 PM

Ze Mind Ze Boggles


thixen ( ) posted Mon, 21 March 2005 at 5:25 PM

"licks cream off fingers:: Oooh! Chocolate!" carefull you might excite someone... Ok for real this time. g'night all see ya in the morin'


geoegress ( ) posted Mon, 21 March 2005 at 5:25 PM

Knees to shoulders-circa 1901 yup- we've come a long way baby.


Birddie ( ) posted Mon, 21 March 2005 at 5:28 PM

You can thank 'HeartSong' for the new TOS. Keep pushing an issue and this is what happens and yes, I'm trying to avoid all the P6 threads. hehe. ;)


Spiritbro77 ( ) posted Mon, 21 March 2005 at 5:28 PM

"I wouldn't flame the mods and admins here, I'm sure this came from higher up, and they were just handed the juicey steak and fed to the wolves." Well, I made a long post in reply but it vanished into the ether. I'm not flaming anyone. I'm calling as I see it. I've been a member here for quite a while. I can't EVER remember one of these threads, where the members are upset over some decision handed down from admin, where the PTB actually took the members feelings into account and backed off changing said decision. I will qualify that statement by saying I haven't read ALL of the threads here at Rosity. I do maintain however that site policy is, make a decision and then implement said decision without regard to memberships feelings about it. C&D gone, OT gone, voting for AOY gone (at least it was last time I even bothered to check, that decision ended my participation in voting here) Merchants that mod elsewhere banned from the merchant forum, Members banned for NO TOS violation, other members NOT banned when clearly in violation of TOS,etc. etc. Now how am I flaming anyone? All I'm saying is you better get used to the new TOS as is, and you better be prepared for it to be unevenly applied. This is nothing new. Reality is a cold hearted, chain smoking bi..h sometimes.


Berserga ( ) posted Mon, 21 March 2005 at 5:32 PM · edited Mon, 21 March 2005 at 5:34 PM

"It's just a real tragedy that the innocence is gone."

The thing you don't seem to get PHONZ is that there never was this golden time of innocence that you long for. There have always been child molesters, Probably the same amount in any given year as there are now. The sensationalist news makes it seem as if the world is going to hell in a handbasket, but It's just about as dangerous as it ever has been.

Another difference is that today people are less naive about it, they won't just let "Weird uncle willy" watch the kids, then sweep the scandal under the rug after something happens to their kid.

Sure to some extent societies openness and the way we communicate today gives these sickos a "peer group" They can all pat eachother on the back... But unless you want to take a step backward technologically you just can't prevent this.

Message edited on: 03/21/2005 17:34


Puntomaus ( ) posted Mon, 21 March 2005 at 5:42 PM

Birddie, I would prefer you would simply keep quiet since all you say is just a lot of :censored:. It's not HS fault that the TOS have been changed and in case you haven't read the entire thread, what I think you didn't since you wouldn't ask it: yes, Aiko pics are also verboten when she looks under 18, what she usually mostly does. Btw, on this site adult content is verboten as well so I do not really understand what you are always saying by adult and children content should not be mixed. And I have no idea why you think you can have an opinion about a long time member who has produced a lot of wonderful images since you have joined this site 3 weeks ago. As a newbie I would think you might get some information first before you go posting.

Every organisation rests upon a mountain of secrets ~ Julian Assange


XENOPHONZ ( ) posted Mon, 21 March 2005 at 5:46 PM

There have always been child molesters, Probably the same amount in any given year as there are now

Sorry, friend....but that just isn't true.

There was a famous case in the mid-1950's of the sexual torture and murder of three preteen boys -- their nude bodies were left dumped on the side of a highway. The perp was only recently brought to justice. Several decades later.

One comment that I saw made on the news by a (now retired) law enforcement officer who had originally been involved on the case back then.....

.....had to do with the fact that while such crimes are more-or-less commonplace nowadays -- back then, it simply didn't happen. Nothing like the numbers today.


You are correct insofar as there never having been a "golden time of innocence", totally free from these types of crimes.

But there is no question that it's far more common in the current era.

As I mentioned earlier, children used to ride their bikes everywhere.

People used to leave their doors unlocked, too.

If you do either one of these things nowadays, then you are living on the edge of uninvited trouble.

No....the "old days" weren't innocent. But neither were they a repeat of even older days. Like we are "enjoying" now.

Something To Do At 3:00AM 



raz ( ) posted Mon, 21 March 2005 at 5:48 PM

Oh and another thing NO MORE G-Dern Nanners. dancing nanners, nanner splits, or nanner chip anythings.. NO NANNERS PERIOD. If I see anyone post a nanner, I'll make a call... "I know a guy"~ >>Shrug<< heeheeheeheeheehhehhe


Byrdie ( ) posted Mon, 21 March 2005 at 5:54 PM

Somebody say nanners? I love nanners, they're yummy with chocolate and whipped cream and ... ::ducks & runs::


tastiger ( ) posted Mon, 21 March 2005 at 5:57 PM

Oh well - there goes all those cute Valentines Day Pics of bare chested Cupids - unless of course cupid has a beard and is carrying his ID card... Seriously did the powers that be "really" look at what type of images this change affects?

The supreme irony of life is that hardly anyone gets out of it alive.
Robert A. Heinlein


11th Gen Intel(R) Core(TM) i9-11900K @ 3.50GHz   3.50 GHz
64.0 GB (63.9 GB usable)
Geforce RTX 3060 12 GB
Windows 11 Pro



Dale B ( ) posted Mon, 21 March 2005 at 5:58 PM

And you will note that Xeno has carefully ignored the fact that the 'perv in the raincoatbusheschatroom' is also pretty much a strawman. This kind of child abuse has always been a family affair, just like other forms of child abuse. And the =past= sentiments have been that it was a family matter, and no one else's business. Genuine child pornographers who are actually aware of the net have been in private chat rooms, BBS's, and P2P rings for years now. The idea of a genuine child molester trolling the galleries here for stroke material is rather laughable. 'Happy Days' was a cute show. With absolutely no connection to the reality of the 1950's. 'The Good Ol Days' were a lot more abusive and perverse than today could ever hope to be, and the yearning for EdenAtlantisAvalonWhatever Golden Age you particular fetish is is just that; a fetish, with no relationship to the realities of history. All too many times, the problem isn't X; it's Y being damned and determined to save everyone else from what they perceive. And if the end is noble, that justifies whatever means are used. Rather like the Witch Trials and various Inquisitions, which were textbook examples of mob manipulation through fear.


jcbwms ( ) posted Mon, 21 March 2005 at 6:04 PM

Comments: The TOS should function within the fashions of the day for the location in which the site functions lawfully. People who bring the concept of child pornography into a discussion of Terms of Service need to improve their ability to reason. Using the grand masters are examples is in error -- every day, in countries around the world, those very same master's works are subject to the same limitations in various wys by various people. The TOS needs to be rewritten to make it clear that often what the administration considers to be "genitals" are more accurately referred to as secondary sex characteristics. Young girls run around as often without their clothes as young boys. After about the age of 5, when body modesty kicks in, things begin to differentiate based on social mores of the locality. The obvious reason for such a change is that the issue of images with nude or partially nude children is becoming too challenging for the current administration team to handle. It was earlier noted that if the forums were closed, the place would become a ghost town. This is incorrect. THe overwhelming majority of the visitors here come solely for the galleries and never even wander into the forums. While thre would be some loss (perhaps as high as 20%), the site would continue on.


raz ( ) posted Mon, 21 March 2005 at 6:10 PM

well im one of those "rare" artists that doesn't lean to the "left" side of things... (runs for cover on this statement)... Doesnt necessarily mean I support any specific person in any office/position either...(disclaimer) having said that, Here's a bit of my NON political philosphies... A. On anyone not wanting to "step on any toes".. I say.. Stomp the H*LL outta em. You'll still be remembered.. trust me.. B. On the saying "Never kick a man while he's down".. I say... CAN YOU THINK OF ANY BETTER OF A TIME???? C. On the above anti-nanner post: My apologies to any nanner lovers out there... I say, nanners are OK as long as they have breast morphs... (Apologies to any small breasted nanners) D. Refried Beans are good. E. Whered I put my glasses? and finally 6. Um ....I never got that pony I always asked for, so I'm bitter...


XENOPHONZ ( ) posted Mon, 21 March 2005 at 6:11 PM

And you will note that Xeno has carefully ignored the fact that the 'perv in the raincoatbusheschatroom' is also pretty much a strawman.

Tell that to a family in Florida.

This kind of child abuse has always been a family affair, just like other forms of child abuse.

True. It still is -- mostly -- but the stranger variety happens, too.

The idea of a genuine child molester trolling the galleries here for stroke material is rather laughable.

I fear that you've missed my point.

I'm merely pointing out the fact that the "defenders of freedom" have defeated themselves.

Follow..........?

As for the motives of the literally 1000's of people that browse these galleries.....I wouldn't have a clue.

And neither do you.

I'm not a big censorship advocate. But I am a realist.

'Happy Days' was a cute show. With absolutely no connection to the reality of the 1950's. 'The Good Ol Days' were a lot more abusive and perverse than today could ever hope to be, and the yearning for EdenAtlantisAvalonWhatever Golden Age you particular fetish is is just that; a fetish, with no relationship to the realities of history.

See my post #210.

And I never cared for 'Happy Days'. The show did nothing for me.

Especially as the series got into its later years -- it had little to nothing to do with the actual 1950's. It was more like the 1970's projected back onto the 50's.

Something To Do At 3:00AM 



Saro ( ) posted Mon, 21 March 2005 at 6:27 PM

You know, when Daz put out there little preschooler set, I was wondering what was going through their heads...you could just see the contraversy getting ready to rear its head. For the most part, I can understand what Renderosity is doing with this policy, and it makes sense that they would need to protect themselves. But the shirt policy for boys seems like overkill to me... On the other hand, I try to remember that this is a big online community, and artistic differences have led to a lot of policy changes here. When you post here, do you think about how the entire Renderosity community might be affected? Renderosity isn't only covering their butts, they're covering ours too. This community only exists as long as the site is allowed to operate, as some of you have already mentioned. I like many things about this site, and I don't want to see it fall prey to a lawsuit because someone decides to ignore their good judgement. I think everyone here knows how far they can push their artistic limits without going overboard. Just exercise good judgement, and if you can't, there are other sites you can post in...


raz ( ) posted Mon, 21 March 2005 at 6:33 PM · edited Mon, 21 March 2005 at 6:35 PM

Reality is: (A serious post this time)

Whether anyone believes it or not, predators ARE far more in numbers than in the past.
I dont have stats, but can get them. We can blame this on degradation of Morals as society, or mere higher polulation numbers bringing the "bad" side of the ratio up. The internet technology hasn't 'helped'protect from these folks either...
As far as things being the way they've always been, that's tru to an extent. Dont kid yourself into beliveing they arent worse. As far as how they deal with it now, compared to before, well, we have advanced (that's debateable) as a 'civilized' society and punishment is handled much differntly now.
The florida case is due to meth maggots that are now plaguing our society. #'s of Educated folks (college grads) are on the decline, crime is up highrer that ever. I work directly in this field and am here to tell you that for every 1 news story you see on TV, there are 20 that are not broadcasted. Victim's and family's of victim's have rights to not report something to media. You'd be shocked (or maybe you wouldn't) as to how many of these folks choose to NOT disclose info to media. perhaps embarassment, more heartache, I can only speculate all the reasons..

Sexual predators are released everyday from incarcaration, most re-offend. Some sleazy liberal defense attory stood up for their "rights" and thes rest is an unfortuneate history. This happend over and over.

Dont get me wrong, I stand for rights (and have fought for as a vet) But belive that the sleazeballs need to be stripped of all of em.
No sympathy from me.
As far as the new TOS.
I submit this to you.
With everything that is going on right now, world wide, is this really that big of a deal? That goes for both sides of the issue.
I will not judge anyone as we all have our opinions.

I personally dont post renders here, vote, or participate in anything but the forums. Perhaps I will one day, but not yet... I DO like this community, been here since 2000? Dont plan to leave.
I am an artist. I am a hobbiest. I do not really care if I cannot post certain images for all others to see. I could also care less whatever rules the fearless leaders have as far as TOS. I will follow them if I'm here. IF I hate them that bad, there are other places out there in cyberland. Folks can always start their own communities....puh-lenty o space on the web.
This is not any debate, just my blabbing on this whole dealio.
Also, if I offended any meth maggots or pervs out there, GOOD. you (if applies) can got to the "bad firey place".

Please dont "call me out" on spelling.. I articulate for a living and get lazy in forums....and dont plan to correct things..

Now, lets all sing Kumbuyah round a campfire/

Message edited on: 03/21/2005 18:35


Saro ( ) posted Mon, 21 March 2005 at 7:00 PM

Good post raz :) I agree.


jonbg1 ( ) posted Mon, 21 March 2005 at 7:09 PM

Raz wrote: "With everything that is going on right now, world wide, is this really that big of a deal?" For those who pour their heart and energy into an image and post it, it can be a big deal. Making art isn't like working on the assembly line and you are told one day that you will no longer be making a certain piece of whatever but only that other kind. Art is something we don't do because we must but because we are driven to, in almost a spirtual way. An image dwells within us, sometimes absorbing us, until we can create it in reality. Yes, to some it is a big deal.


SamTherapy ( ) posted Mon, 21 March 2005 at 7:12 PM

body modesty" ? That's learned behaviour. When left to their own devices in societies without nudity taboos, this trait does not develop. Is nudity wrong? Are nude children wrong? No. Both are entirely context dependent. RO are playing safe because they may get their (nude or otherwise) asses sued off if someone with an agenda tries to convince a legal hotshot that they are a hotbed of kid porn. Businesses absolutely do not sail close to the wind if they have any long term plans. They play it safe. Real safe. I'm not completely happy with the TOS revision even though I will probably never want to make pictures of nude or topless children but I really do not blame RO for taking this stance. Apologies for the late post re this - my ISP went tits up.

Coppula eam se non posit acceptera jocularum.

My Store

My Gallery


Kristta ( ) posted Mon, 21 March 2005 at 7:14 PM

ROFL You guys should all run over to the galleries. Right under the bright red link for changes to the TOS child nudity, is a new image of guess what.....a well endowed and very naked Laura from Daz. he he he. That is one well endowed 12 year old. Kristta (now thinking it's gonna take a while for them to get rid of all the well endowed Lauras in the galleries)


anxcon ( ) posted Mon, 21 March 2005 at 7:14 PM

The idea of a genuine child molester trolling the galleries here for stroke material is rather laughable. o_o lol isnt just them........probably half the poser artists i seen plenty of threads on many sites calling the new Poser 6 poser sex >_> including dr geep here lol doc that was a funny pic there is a simple solution to all of this this thread is getting long so ill put in a new


arcady ( ) posted Mon, 21 March 2005 at 7:16 PM

Well, community desires may be what they are, but there are all of ZERO legal issues here with anything but photography. You can read the Supreme Court rulings to see that imagry, fiction, and so on that does not involve actual minors is not legally considered to cover minors - even if it implies minors or uses drawing or digitally made images that resemble or are otherwise made to look like minors. If it isn't real, the law doesn't care about. Social values can go wherever they like on that however. Go to Korea and you will see naked baby boy pictures proudly displayed in the windows of every photo development shop and professional photo studio - families want to be proud of their sons, and so everyone takes a picture, and it's not seen in any odd light at all. Go back even ten years in the USA and the same holds true. Nearly every one of us who is an adult has a picture somewhere in our mother's photo album of us playing, swimming, bathing, or something. And nearly all of us have seen countless cupids, fairies, and so on. Even on TV I can see those naked babies in flowers and other similar artwork. Go back to paintings, and we can see countless pics of kids skinny dipping. Even the coppertone sun screen lotion logo is an example of this.

Truth has no value without backing by unfounded belief.
Renderosity Gallery


arcady ( ) posted Mon, 21 March 2005 at 7:18 PM · edited Mon, 21 March 2005 at 7:21 PM

On the note on predators. As someone who works in criminal justice, the actual numbers of these kinds of people is -DOWN-. In fact numbers are dropping fast from historic highs, and have been doing so for far longer than the current conservative swing in society. In fact the trend for all violent crime has been going down since the middle ages... HOWEVER... IF the trend was going up recently, it would just be evidence of how BAD of an idea policies like this one are. This new policy sexualizes innocent imagry. Images that previously had no sexual connotation. As we sexualize children, we CREATE the fetish around them, and that can drive up sexual asaults upon them.

Message edited on: 03/21/2005 19:21

Truth has no value without backing by unfounded belief.
Renderosity Gallery


SamTherapy ( ) posted Mon, 21 March 2005 at 7:20 PM · edited Mon, 21 March 2005 at 7:23 PM

Good post, raz. I don't agree with you about the amount of predators (at least, not if we're talking about percentages) but I agree with pretty much the rest of your post.

Bottom line, gang - you don't have to post here. It's just a site, like any other. It ain't a sanctuary of artistic freedom or a temple to your particular muse. And... much as I believe in artistic freedom I'd have a fuck of a hard time convincing myself to give kid fiddlers any kind of freedom, be it artistic, legal, physical or any other. Edited because I can't type due to nerve damage. Going for the sympathy vote? ;)

Message edited on: 03/21/2005 19:23

Coppula eam se non posit acceptera jocularum.

My Store

My Gallery


yp6 ( ) posted Mon, 21 March 2005 at 7:27 PM

Sexual predators are released everyday from incarcaration, most re-offend. Some sleazy liberal defense attory stood up for their "rights" and thes rest is an unfortuneate history. I have seen the LIGHT! And am certain the pervs get their ideas browsing the galleries here. But ya know what? I'll bet alcohol contributes to even more harm to society. Rosity should also ban any images of alcoholic beverages, or anything liquid just to be on the safe side. And remember the woman in Texas who murdered her kids because "God told her to?" Religion must be dangerous, so the TOS should ban anything religious while it's at it. And to the management of Renderosity: Thank you so much for looking out for the safety of the children!


Byrdie ( ) posted Mon, 21 March 2005 at 7:34 PM

Big banner ad on the front page has an animation of the Cubed baby. And it's a major violation of the new TOS here since the little one is ::averts eyes & prays for your forgiveness:: crawling around totally starkers! Falls over and shows off his cute little ... Whoops! Better not finish that or I might be mistaken for a sleazoid. And I'll have you all know this lil ol' featherhead's a totally respectable pervert. ;-)


tastiger ( ) posted Mon, 21 March 2005 at 7:48 PM

Surely in some way this must affect Renderosity to a certain extent. If people can't post their images of cupid, faries or whatever here, then won't they go somewhere where they can? Perhaps someone in a more enlightened country will open up an alternate forum for us to post our images?

The supreme irony of life is that hardly anyone gets out of it alive.
Robert A. Heinlein


11th Gen Intel(R) Core(TM) i9-11900K @ 3.50GHz   3.50 GHz
64.0 GB (63.9 GB usable)
Geforce RTX 3060 12 GB
Windows 11 Pro



yp6 ( ) posted Mon, 21 March 2005 at 7:54 PM

And ya know what? That center of sin, DAZ, has nude kiddie-pics! Better go through and delete all links to those perverts at DAZ3D! And Curious Labs sells software to make such pics! Gotta distance ourselves from them and their products too. Wouldn't want anyone to think the management here was full of hipocrits.


anxcon ( ) posted Mon, 21 March 2005 at 7:56 PM

other sites can have that posted and yes artists will move there i myself will too, and thus make me less likely to buy in stores that are on R'osity if i stay at all o_o they want to hurt themselves by banning art why should i help them to heal?


SndCastie ( ) posted Mon, 21 March 2005 at 7:58 PM

Byrdie If you find an image that needs to be reviewed, please send the URL to admin@renderosity.com SndCastie


Sandy
An imagination can create wonderful things

SndCastie's Little Haven


arcady ( ) posted Mon, 21 March 2005 at 8:02 PM

Sexual predators are released everyday from incarcaration, most re-offend. Some sleazy liberal defense attory stood up for their "rights" and thes rest is an unfortuneate history. This happend over and over. This is a wonderful fiction of the right... As for standing up for rights... That's not sleazy, that ensuring the freedoms and liberties we value as a free society. It's what I personally did when I went to war for this country, and it's what I do now working in the criminal justice system. If we don't stand up for rights and freedom, people like you will strip us of all of them in the name of security. Someone has to be about freedom in all of this. When I went into the military I swore to defend and protect the Constitution of the United States of America from all enemies, foreign and domestic. I for one, value that pledge still, even if you don't. All criminals have high recidivism rates, and it's largely due not to punishment but to a failure to address the underlying conditions that led them into deviant behavior in the first place. In fact, we ostracize felons to the point that once they get out they typicall have no choice but to go even deeper into a deviant lifestyle. We take away their rights to travel, freedom of association, voting, buying homes, and even getting jobs - leaving them with no valid options and no ability to reform. For sexual predators, we do the same, but we also spend an amazing amount of energy focusing on their deviancy, making formerly asexual topics highly sexualized within our society - such as with the issue of children - to the point that we draw them to it like flies. We create our predators by first creating the fetish, and only then does it occur to people to consider that behavior. Sure, there have always been predators, but define and create more of them by focusing so much on what they do, and how they do it. We instruct each and every member of society on not just what is wrong, but how to define it, how to think about it, and how to do it. After all, in order to tell them not to do it we first have to teach them what it is and how it could be done. A policy like this new one doesn't help the issue. It either has zero impact or it helps to create the issue by making the topic of children further sexualized within our social norms. How many of us grew up thinking of cupids and angels and the Coppertone girl and kids swimming in the pond as sexual? I surely didn't, as did few others in my generation. But today we force ourselves to think of these topics this way... We create deviancy, we create predators, by misguided methods of trying to stop them.

Truth has no value without backing by unfounded belief.
Renderosity Gallery


Byrdie ( ) posted Mon, 21 March 2005 at 8:11 PM · edited Mon, 21 March 2005 at 8:14 PM

Was referring to a banner ad on the CL Content Paradise site, not here. But thanks for the info, sandcastle, I'll keep that in mind should I find myself (still) wondering what's kosher & what ain't. Edited to ask: Did I just get your name wrong? Sorry. In my defense, it looked like sandcastle. Must be staring at the monitor too long.

Message edited on: 03/21/2005 20:14


STORM3 ( ) posted Mon, 21 March 2005 at 8:13 PM

Look up!

This was an Artist's Community, now it is an Art Community.
Better take out both words and call it what it is, a SHOP!

Business people (particularly retailers) get notions about themselves, thinking that when they run a venue for artists and the sale of art, they are somehow connected to its creation, and as a consequence, Movers and Shakers in the ART WORLD.
Ooooh the Ego and the Id ;0)

I know a lot of Gallery Art Dealers; I call those dealers Parasites. They remind me of property dealers trying to take credit for the few architectural masterpieces that come their way.
Soon they start believing that they are authorities on what they sell and art itself, and should have a say in what the world perceives and accepts as art and where its future lies.

God help us, the blind leading the wannabes.

Welcome to trying to get a small (minuscule) footnote in history.
Welcome to ignorant woolly-headed thinking trying to make a mark for itself!

Michael Angelo and his David need not apply!

The ostrich sticks its head in the sand, some humans have their heads up their *****.

This place becomes more amusing by the day ;0)


rowan_crisp ( ) posted Mon, 21 March 2005 at 8:14 PM

BRAF*CKINGVO, ARCADY! Well said!


elizabyte ( ) posted Mon, 21 March 2005 at 8:21 PM

This seems both knee-jerk and somewhat mean-spirited, I must say. I had an image in my gallery of a completely innocent baby, which was topless (it was even a boy baby, although you couldn't have seen it in the image). I've removed it. I care less and less about Renderosity and their stupid policies every day. bonni

"When a man gives his opinion, he's a man. When a woman gives her opinion, she's a bitch." - Bette Davis


arcady ( ) posted Mon, 21 March 2005 at 8:22 PM · edited Mon, 21 March 2005 at 8:30 PM

To all the people who keep saying "if you don't like it, just take it elsewhere" I have to ask...

Where?

There really aren't any large viable galleries outside of this place.

And don't say renderotica... for those of us who believe a couple kids in bathing suits are NOT porn that isn't anything of an option. Nobody want's a pic of their son in his new bathing suit side by side with some anime tenticle-porn render... Nor even the render of kids in a bubble bath (thus hiding below the waist) or even the recent poser render I saw in the galleries of a family nude at a beach all rendered from the backside.

None of those are porn, if they can no longer go here...

Where?

Yeah, I have a gallery there (otica), but it's where I've put my stuff that really does belong there in one sense or another - mostly 'temple vicky' style or severity. The 'temple vicky' stuff you see here belongs there more than the 'rockwell paintings' do...

So just WHERE does non-erotic child fully digital or drawn no-real-children-involved art go, if it can no longer go here?
Where can the -art- go, that will get good exposure and not cause the artist to get a 'label' attached to them?

Message edited on: 03/21/2005 20:30

Truth has no value without backing by unfounded belief.
Renderosity Gallery


Qualien ( ) posted Mon, 21 March 2005 at 8:31 PM

(Dang, I can't write fast enough to keep my venting current with the posts! Oh well, here goes...)

Ok, one more time:
Top 10 workarounds for the new restrictions:

  1. Go to Poser Hair Room and put beards on all children, giving the impression that they are old (I know this will work because I have a beard and people can tell I'm old).
  2. Move Rosity from Tennessee to France, where the women and children wear no pants, and it's legal, I think.
  3. Use Carrara to create Fake ID's for all children, and post these in the Free Stuff section.
  4. Yeti children. (Thank you Rowan Crisp!!! Yes, their hair will hide their sin, the sin of their humanity, or humanequeness, or humanoidness, whichever comes first (no pun intended).)
  5. Perhaps someone in a more enlightened country will open up an alternate forum for us to post our images.

Perhaps. Yes Now that I think about it, yes! Some country without so many MadMother Witch Hunters, impervious to reason in any form. Some country with neither G.W. Bush or the ACLU.

Am I the only one who thinks: Suddenly, the US has come to seem a place eaten up by the opinion hated. "Blue/Red, Right/Left who's side are you on?" (Yes, I probably am.) But, just maybe, the truth is not so bipolar and one dimensional.

"We create deviancy, we create predators, by misguided methods of trying to stop them..." Speak for yourself, pinky. Maybe you create them, but I never created a single one. Your philosophy is long-discredited Marxist environmental determinism. Who are you, Richard Lewontin's girly boy? May I say, in the spirit of this thread, that you suck and that's sad.

Now, do I have a 5.?


slinger ( ) posted Mon, 21 March 2005 at 8:34 PM

"There really aren't any large viable galleries outside of this place."

Maybe there would be if people posted in them?

My first thoughts were http://www.thorneworks.com/closely followed by http://www.faeriewylde.com/

The liver is evil - It must be punished.


SamTherapy ( ) posted Mon, 21 March 2005 at 8:34 PM

"So just WHERE does non-erotic child fully digital or drawn no-real-children-involved art go, if it can no longer go here?" Your own site?

Coppula eam se non posit acceptera jocularum.

My Store

My Gallery


JenX ( ) posted Mon, 21 March 2005 at 8:35 PM

One more time, please....no personal attacks, and please keep this civil. Again, we're taking in all of your feedback. We'd like to keep this (and the other threads like it on Renderosity) open so you can vent your frustration and give us feedback on the new TOS. MorriganShadow Poser Coord

Sitemail | Freestuff | Craftythings | Youtube|

Knowledge is knowing a tomato is a fruit. Wisdom is not putting it into a fruit salad.


arcady ( ) posted Mon, 21 March 2005 at 8:36 PM

"Posting from Great Britain, where the law explicitly states that indecent pictures of somebody over-18 who happens to look underage are illegal" Thats one of the newer laws here in the US as well, No it's not. the Supreme Court ruling on Ashcroft v ACLU and COPA were very clear on this. If it isn't an actual real child; it is unconstitutional to make a law making it illegal.

Truth has no value without backing by unfounded belief.
Renderosity Gallery


anxcon ( ) posted Mon, 21 March 2005 at 8:37 PM
  1. build a home made nuke or hydrogen bomb, the net has all the info you need, and easy to order the items, if you know where to look anyways, no people, no whining


tastiger ( ) posted Mon, 21 March 2005 at 8:37 PM

"And don't say renderotica" No go there either - No children allowed in any shape or form (I had an image of cupid removed)- however fairies were still allowed when last I visited them..... Hence my comment about a more enlightened Country. Well said arcady I was going to mention how this looks to someone from outside the US - but I shall keep my thoughts on that myself....

The supreme irony of life is that hardly anyone gets out of it alive.
Robert A. Heinlein


11th Gen Intel(R) Core(TM) i9-11900K @ 3.50GHz   3.50 GHz
64.0 GB (63.9 GB usable)
Geforce RTX 3060 12 GB
Windows 11 Pro



rowan_crisp ( ) posted Mon, 21 March 2005 at 8:45 PM

file_204121.jpg

Qualien,
  1. Invisible children.


tastiger ( ) posted Mon, 21 March 2005 at 8:48 PM

"Now, do I have a 5.?" Yea - you interested in opening a Market Place Store that sells only singlets for underage males - we'd be sure to be on a winner!:)

The supreme irony of life is that hardly anyone gets out of it alive.
Robert A. Heinlein


11th Gen Intel(R) Core(TM) i9-11900K @ 3.50GHz   3.50 GHz
64.0 GB (63.9 GB usable)
Geforce RTX 3060 12 GB
Windows 11 Pro



XENOPHONZ ( ) posted Mon, 21 March 2005 at 8:49 PM

On the note on predators. As someone who works in criminal justice, the actual numbers of these kinds of people is -DOWN-. In fact numbers are dropping fast from historic highs, and have been doing so for far longer than the current conservative swing in society. In fact the trend for all violent crime has been going down since the middle ages...

Oh, really?

The 20th century was about the bloodiest in recorded history.

Let's see.....

Stalin killed around 30 million or so....more directly than Hitler did.

Hitler helped to finish around 40 million or so -- if you include all of those that died as a result of WWII. Hitler's party.

Not to mention Mao, Pol Pot, the Turkish massacre of Armenians, Rwanda.....just to name a few of the more famous cases.

I could go on and on, but you get the general idea.

The Mongols only managed to kill an estimated 10,000,000 or so during their conquests.

Crime down since the Middle Ages? In the Western world, perhaps.

But the world as a whole? I don't think so........


Sure, some crimes in the US have been dropping since the 80's. And this is largely due to the fact that a number of criminals are being locked up, and the key thrown away.

Due to the "conservative swing" in certain attitudes.

;-)

But as a rule -- at least in the US -- in grandad's day, one rarely (very rarely) saw crimes of the magnitude of the Florida case.

Old men used to be able to play checkers on the streets of downtown Philadelphia -- in neighborhoods that one wouldn't be caught (so to speak) "dead" in these days.

And one never saw a Columbine High School massacre. Even though it was possible to easily mail order a howitzer, complete with shells.

Nope. It's not as complex, or as simple.....as some would like to make it out to be.

Something To Do At 3:00AM 



geoegress ( ) posted Mon, 21 March 2005 at 8:56 PM

Attached Link: http://rendervisions.com/

In response to Post 239 Where? At rendervisions- where the owners are smarter then the owners are here and can see with there own eyes weather an art piece is porn or art. Where common sence is more powerfull the nickles and cents. For Artist- By Artist is our motto. The LAST artist COMMUNITY on the net.


Qualien ( ) posted Mon, 21 March 2005 at 8:59 PM · edited Mon, 21 March 2005 at 9:06 PM

"...so you can vent your frustration and give us feedback on the new TOS..." admin

Madame or Sir as the case may be,
I assure you, I meant no disrespect, but I am venting as fast as I can! Every time I click on Refresh, some other venter has vented, and also another! I ask you, what can I do? Your Englais lingo is not my lingau de guerre.

If I said, "you suck and that's sad" (which I guess I did) I profess many illegitamate apologies.

You talking to me? No? Ok, sorry.

  1. build a home made nuke or hydrogen bomb, the net has all
    the info you need, and easy to order the items, if you know
    where to look anyways, no people, no whining , anxcon

Yes! Thank you. I'm not sure how to take this exactly. But, ok. I will pretend to see what you're getting at. Annhilation of human race and so, whining that goes with them. See vou plais. Ok, gotcha.

Build a home impervious to nukes, even hydrogen. Don't forget generator, so we can build net anew, a nice clean fresh new net. Free of bacteria. "And don't say renderotica" Ok.

5a. Invisible children.

Even better than Yeti Youths! If these minors are invisible, we cannot see their privates or even publics! Voila! I can see the Rosity Galleries now, filled with perfectly invisible images. Perfect! Possibly even better than nuclear weapons!

"Yea - you interested in opening a Market Place Store that sells only singlets for underage males - we'd be sure to be on a winner!:)"

But what do we win? That is what bothers me. Be careful what you win, my old granny always told me.

Now, a 4 (I lost count there for a second).

Message edited on: 03/21/2005 21:06


Privacy Notice

This site uses cookies to deliver the best experience. Our own cookies make user accounts and other features possible. Third-party cookies are used to display relevant ads and to analyze how Renderosity is used. By using our site, you acknowledge that you have read and understood our Terms of Service, including our Cookie Policy and our Privacy Policy.