Forum: Community Center


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

StaceyG opened this issue on Mar 21, 2005 ยท 174 posts


jcbwms posted Wed, 23 March 2005 at 2:15 AM

Now this is cause for celebration. Two threads ont he same topic, both filled with people with the same desire to make a rule change on a privately owned site into some sort of societal attack on their rights as they struggle in vain to discern the motives behind the change in rules. Those of you doing so are all ever so enjoyably simple. The more I look around this place, the more I find cause for laughing out loud at the antics herein. The Reason behind the rule change is irrelevant. For those of you with less capable vocabularies, that means it does not matter why the changed the rule. The overwhelming bulk of this thread is filled with poorly concieved and utterly indefensible arguments, as well. We have consipracy theories, darwinism, social engineeering, religion, sex, perversion, and digital models of infants whose gender is impossible to distinguish without social clothing conventions provided seperately. Good lord, people. It is apparent that you are so desperate for some semblance of adult conversation that you are willing to accept this instead. Stop. Sit back. Breathe deep the gathering gloom. Then get on with discussing the actual issue at hand, not the assumptive why or the hand wringing worry. That issue is that a rule change has been made. That rule change has since been modified or is in the process of being modified. Talk about those modifications. I agree, incidentally, that it will raise the spectre of sexism in art, but that spectre has always been exactly that -- a spectre. A half formed phantom, an illusion -- something that is used to scare and or frighten young children and the feeble of mind. However, the changes do accomplish what needed to be accomplished. Instead of an outright ban that would, in effect, create a massive workload for the staff, they have gone with a much more sensible approach and made the limitations effect the dress conventions of the location in which the site operates. As for everyone else, piss off. You don't run the site. I don't, either -- but I'm not accusing people of pedophilia or censorship or trying to make it seem like they are some sort of "anti-art" or hate fairie pictures. Someone said that Renderosity is a "give and take" place. In short, your assumptive reasoning is incorrect. For a small fee of 30.00 USD, I will correct it for you, although in so doing you will lose the entire structure of your argument and need to repost. Someone else inferred that people have no place to go (as well as mindlessly stating that the efforts here, predominantly created by people having fun, are inferior to other CG sites, predominantly created by people trying to get a job or working in the field -- now that is a real winner of a thought loop) other than here. Aside from being patently absurd and obviously made due to a lack of awareness, it too is eligible for the previous offer. One thing that I think would make much of this less troublesome is for the administration to invest a few minutes in pointing out that while they might have an interest in what people think, they have no true need to make changes based on the views of membership. It is their right and responsibility to do what they feel needs to be done. Not what the members feel. Indeed -- my post here, and those posts of all those who I am mocking, are all violations of the Terms of service, and everyone involved in doing so could recieve a warning for having done such or summarily be banned (I expect to be so by the end of the year, myself, given my procliviities). Since I am feeling generous, a list (inclusive of my own, which I cannot number) of those posts which violate one or more provisions of the TOS -- but purely at the discretion of the administration of this site: 2, 3, 4, 6, 7, 8, 23, 28, 30, 34, 38, 45, 48, 50, 51, 55, 57, 58, 60, 62, 65, 66, 68, 69, 70, 72, 78, 80, 81, 82, 84, 85, 86, 96, 97, 99, 104, 105, 107, 108, 112, 118, 119, 123, 128, 131, 132, 133, 134, 135, 138, 141, 142, 145, 146, 152, 153, 154, and mine. (at the time of this writing, there are 161 posts, so the above list may expand) So stop it. Now. Deal with what really is, not with what you think it might be or why it might be.