The great thing about standards is that there are so many to choose from. (old joke). If you ask someone to take some images off a site, you are implying that something is wrong with these images. That's just logic. I would quite like to know what was wrong with these images. It seems to me that that's a reasonable question.

As a note: While there's plenty of opportunity here for political discussion of the pros and cons of various policies regarding nudityin any form, it's the site's policy not to allow them. Other than not wanting the thread locked and to disappear, I dinnae care :) lol. I've been around lng enough to know what will generally fly and won't, and prefer to let the discussions continue without getting into a sort of user fight with the mods that's a no win sitch anywho -- all exclusive of the fact that the subject at hand is a website run by a very small group of folks and owned by two who happen to have sentiments not unlike those expressed already politically speaking. On to momodot's questions, with a small sidebar... Sidebar: good pull on the "think" not "feel". Most responses to this are emotional, not rational, thus far. Should there be a relationship? Well, as a writer, from my perspective, its inescapable. People will always associate a fictional image with a real one if they have any connection to it -- it's that association that creates that connection. What maks it difficult for a lot of people is that there is a sort of underlying expectation based on the commonality of the human condition and culture surrounding the individual that their peers are going to have a similar association and connection, when the truth is that in a world of 6 billion people who are generally highly mobile and come from several thousand potential cultural, sub-cultural, and local norm and mores structures its far more probable that they won't. In an environment such as this one, which is considerably more global in membership than the average small town, this is going to be exaggerated by various social forces, including the commonly found separation between artist and society (historically, artists are usually held to be outside asociety, both by their own acts and the acts of the societies they tend to portray in various forms and expressions). So, to me, the question is irrelevant. As something that cannot help but exist, particularly in the mind of someone who isn't part of the subcultural strata that this place belongs who is visiting and making comparisons to their own experiences in order to make sense of it, it's going to be present no matter what, simply as an extension of the fact that these things are representations of humans. What could make a figure a toon figure, yet clearly not an issue in terms of child nudity? Nothing. Be it from inexperience, lack of skill, worldview, or just plain orneriness, someone will always percieve something to be young, if they want to do so. A wrinkled old wizend figure, small, with grey hair? Why, that could be a child afflicted with that aging disease if the person's experience and interprestation so allows. There are staruday morning cartoons where the characters are drawn looking 10 or 12 to me, but they are supposed to be teens. And others where the teen looking figures are supposed to be 10 or 12. It's too dependent onthe indidviual's perceptions, and therefore subject to the vagaries of such. I still chuckle over the people who watched LOTR and asked why it was that a bunch of kids were entrusted with the ring. This also addresses your corollary, "Are there toons that are clearly ove the age of seventeen?". Again, a personal thing. I happen to find the Lina to be a bit young looking, for example, but as for anime doll, the koshini folks, and similar figures, I'm just as agahst as the next person that theycan be readily concieved of as being underage. On the other hand, I'm sensitive to the fact that while "anime" may be mainstream for us, for the bulk of the american public (and, since RO is governed by american laws, they do tend to have more say in the matter) they are not -- and that the majority of that same public tends to underestimate the age of most asian folks by five to ten years on average (whereas they overestimate the age of most black folks by three to five on average*). * University of Tucson Sociology review, 2001 In my personal opinion, the questions to be asking are: 1 - Where can I make images for store products like that? 2 - Where can I get store products that are not going to be updated (for example, Wyrmmaster, who is overseas in the military and unable to address this issue for an indeterminate amount of time)? 3 - Do I really want to hang at this site anymore, or should it just be a place I visit? 4 - How long until this affects the galleries if it really is about marketshare (since they'll never make it off the lists as long as those images are still in the gallery -- and likely not even then). 5 - Why does ynsaen have to be so damned long winded all the time. Stupid girl always goes on and on and on and on. Sheesh...

I would quite like to know what was wrong with these images. It seems to me that that's a reasonable question. Absolutely a reasonable question. And answered, as well. The thing that is "wrong" with these images is that they no longer meet the policy for store images. That's it. And, indeed, these particular images are only falling under attack now becuase there's been a lot of complaints (according to the store admins here) that it wasn't fair for new merchants to have to follow one set of rules, while these older products that were there before hand didn't have to. All they've done is made the rules apply to all products now, instead of just the new ones. This policy has been in place for several months now (back before the whole renda bs), so it's not like its actually anything new, other than the specific additions of the anime figures to the list of what they consider child like )(and, given what I recall in the merchant forum, that's almost certainly a direct result of merchant's whining about how they don't think such and such a promo is too young, while the admins do. Sorta makes their lives a lot easier).

"All they've done is made the rules apply to all products now, instead of just the new ones. This policy has been in place for several months now (back before the whole renda bs), so it's not like its actually anything new, other than the specific additions of the anime figures to the list of what they consider child like )(and, given what I recall in the merchant forum, that's almost certainly a direct result of merchant's whining about how they don't think such and such a promo is too young, while the admins do. Sorta makes their lives a lot easier)." Erm, no. That is completely incorect. The "No nudity in the thumb or first image" rule, yes. The rest, no. That was brought in last week, without any exception. Models that were ok to be shown nude were moved to the "Great big you're a Kid Fiddler" list overnight. Ang that's what really gets my goat. Suddenly, someone decides that Miki and Aiko are kids and I can no longer represent nude images of them on my product pages but - get this, gang - it's ok to show them stark nekkid in the galleries! Jesus Harry Christ on a pogo stick. Where is the sense in any of that?

Hey, I did say "other than the specific additions of the anime figures to the list of what they consider child like ". As for sense... C'mon, ST -- you've been around a while, Sense? RO? Used together like that in a single sentence? The segment half the galleries by program, and half by some vague concept of format, and then don't really do much for making sure it works. They have a store that breaks pretty much every "standard" design rule out there. They use bondware. They still let me post here. Renderosity having sense. Next you'll be telling me I'm not crazy. And yeah. it is rahter silly. I mean, how do you define 80% of a virtual breast? And which 80% counts? I mean, I can cover everything but the nipple, and that doesn't count, but it's within guidelines. And I am serious. I'm looking for more folks to join ODF as merchants. I'm bieng flat out boisterous about it. I know that DAZ and Poser PRos are knockin, and I'm pretty certain Faerie Dreams and Animotions aren't gonna say no all that much either, lol. Vanishing Point's a nice place. Heck, even sixus1's site is a nice little place to go for some. SamTherapy, we've seen this stuff so much, ya know the score by now. IT's just a question of when is it enough? I like visitng renderosity. Nice gallery pics, my friends are here that I don't get to see when I coop myself up over at ODF, good discussions, good info, and, of course, the consistency of the decsion making process here. BUt is it the be all and end all of psoerdom for me? nah. I spend more time at RDNA than here, about the same as at DAZ, and I sneak aroud a few other sites out there now and again cuase it's all cool stuff and for many of the same reasons. but here, particularly, it's the hub, if you will. It's always to check in and check out. Just keep the stays short...

I really don't care what Renderosity's new "agenda" might be, though I imagine it must be nice to have the time to speculate endlessly about it. All I care about is that with this stupid new decision, I am now in a position where if I buy a Miki texture, I might unknowingly buy a hitler crotch mustache instead of proper pubic hair on a female. Or god forbid, tiny neon pink nipples. Really, this doesn't seem well thought out. DAZ can get away with this kind of policy because they have a 30-day, no questions asked, money-back guarantee. Have any of you ever tried to get your money back from Rendo? It's as painful as shaving your head with a cheese grater while chewing on tinfoil, and that's when it WORKS. Anyways Renderosity: I hope your "sound business decision" makes up for all the people who won't be buying stuff from you because they're afraid of buying what they can't see. Or actually, what I really hope is that you institute a return policy like your competitors. Yep, that'd be okay with me. I'm still mildly insulted that because Miki is asian you think she's a child, but I've got too many other things to worry about to get too worked up over that.

I would like to know specifically what people think (not how they feel) about the categorization of Toons as children I've never thought that The GIRL looks like a child or a teenager. I also have never EVER thought that LaRoo looks like a child or teenager, and I'm kinda shocked to see her on the list. I don't really understand the criteria being used here... I get that The GIRL has big eyes and a pouty mouth along with her enormous breasts and teeny waist and big round hips and curvy bottom and some people think that anything with big eyes is a child, but LaRoo doesn't appear to have ANY characteristics that would make her at all childlike, so who knows. Maybe they ARE saying "toon = child", who knows. Seems peculiar to me, but I don't make the rules and I've never been able to entirely figure out the reasoning being some of the rules around here. I just don't let it bother me and get on with my life and that works for me. I used to care a great deal about Renderosity, but these days, eh. Whatever. Life is much happier for me when I don't give it much weight (or much money). bonni

Stahlratte, you are exactly right. "Where is the sense in any of that?" There is no sense in it. No one who isn't channeling Scott McClellan or smoking crack would pretend there is. The whole thing would have merely reeked had they not insisted on this last bit of whatever in the name of Groucho it is. If nothing else, I'd be worried about ending up in the dock saying, 'Yes, your honor, we felt that these were underage nude images but we felt they were OK as long as we weren't making money on them...' I bet that'll fly real well with a Bible Belt jury. Nope, this Looney Toons moment is high corporate strategy. The only question is will naked Miki's be banned totally before or in conjunction with the banning of naked anything. They may say they're gonna let the inspectors do their job but the decision's already been made. Naked Vicki will be removed from power and cheering masses will strew Visa chits in the victor's path like flower petals.

Folks Im not here asking wether or not a company can do as they pleas with their own assets, that goes without saying. Renderosity can require all merchant promo pice to include magic pink ponies and yes wed have to follow their rules. Coke had every right to change their formula too. What Im asking is do you agree with the characters placed on the list? Sense the merchants were told the decisions were based on the opinions of the staff with no specific criteria Im thinking this list is highly subjective and questionable. And whats with the sudden anti nude thing anyway if you own Poser in any form you are going to see, work with, and manipulate nude human models. Also Ive never considered Poser as a kids toy. And yes Im not quite so uptight as my 79 year old grandmother in labeling all nudity as porn. I see at least four of the characters on that list as just plane silly but now thats my opinion.

"Im thinking this list is highly subjective and questionable." It is highly subjective. Can't be anything but subjective. Unfortunately, questionable is moot, however. Bitchable about -- well now, that's a whole nother ball of wax :D

"The thing that is "wrong" with these images is that they no longer meet the policy for store images." Inane and needlessly paternalistic answer, doesn't even meet the industry standards. What does this change of policy portends? THAT is what most of us are asking and are worried about. When the administration wishes to pacify or placate they describe this site as a community. Few communities accept change without demanding to know the reasons behind the changes and how it will affect the future. "New policy", 'Industry standards' or a plain "'cause" just won't cut it, Q

I think one could say that any Poser model sold as a child or (horrible term) "young adult" could be placed on the list without any subjective decision making.

"Inane and needlessly paternalistic answer, doesn't even meet the industry standards." I agree without reservation. But it's the one they gave us. And it is the answer. "What does this change of policy portends? THAT is what most of us are asking and are worried about." Well, that would require speculation. Which, given that none of us have access to the full range of data, would require assumptions, which, when combined would lead to nothing getting figured out and likely a fair amount of misinformation dispersed (if you'll forgive my own speculation there). "When the administration wishes to pacify or placate they describe this site as a community. Few communities accept change without demanding to know the reasons behind the changes and how it will affect the future." I'll confess I'm horrifically jaded here, and do not, and have not, considered renderosity itself a community for many a long year. Too many of these types of issues have worn me a tad thin, so, I'll have to bow out there as I'll lose what little objectivity I have. The Community is a hell of a lot bigger than just renderosity, and is most assuredly not subject to the whims and caprices of the small team in charge of the store here. "I think one could say that any Poser model sold as a child or (horrible term) "young adult" could be placed on the list without any subjective decision making." Well... Ok, ya got a heck of a point there, lol. This list itself, however, well, that's definitely a subjective thing. Then again, maybe it's just a most likely a subjective thing. Ok -- I, personally, don't see how it could possibly be anything but subjective, as a whole, since someone had to sit and decide "what figures usually look too young in these promos?" THe kids are probably a given (although I've managed to get some decently adult looking Lauras and Lukes, and I wouldn't call some of Thorne and Sarsa's work on the old Milgrils kids), but hey -- ya know, it's a blanket ruling.

What I don't understand is why the expanded list is not being rolled out to the gallery as well. If Miki is a minor in the store, why is she not being considered one in the gallery? I understand that this is a private site and as a business must make its rules with an eye to what the largest market demands. I don't like it but I do accept it. However, the gesture with regards to the list (not backdating the first promo image rule) is surely made worthless if the rest of the site is not consistent with it.

Sigh. My post vanished. Let's have another go. Bt briefer/blunter.

A lot of adults - America, UK, and so on - associate toons with children. The Bratz, like Barbie and Cindee and so on may be adult "aged" dolls but they also have adult-aged toon depictions. Still, Barbie or Cindee or The Bratz "Toons" doing centerfold renders would cause raised eyebrows I'm sure. Not because the "characters" are underaged, but because their audience is.

So if RO are following the usual interpretation that "toon=for kids" then marking toon figures for "underage treatment" actually makes some kind of sense.

Cheers,

Cliff

Message edited on: 01/01/2006 04:37

If something is forbidden for fear of prosecution this is perhaps understandable. Otherwise its just censorship, an activity undertaken by various misguided governments groups and individuals over the years to no effect whatsoever.

This is just my opinion. I don't think Miki should be on the list. Even if she is petite looking, Stephanie Petite isn't on the list is she? Morrigan?

I can see the room for arguement with regards to toons, it is, as you say, the 'usual' audience. It doesn't bother me as it will others. Miki seems like an odd choice but it is theirs to make. However, the inconsistency is a shot in the foot. They need to make up their minds as to the direction they want to go and just go that way. DAZ has - very successfuly - and without complaint from it's customers. There are other places to show pictures if you want to show nudes - numerous free galleries (and I'm not thinking of 'rotica).

Hey she isn't nude? :)

I have no input on Store decisions, as I am not Store staff, I am Site staff. In the store, I'm just a regular merchant. ;) Any questions for Store staff should be asked to either ClintH or Debbie M. MS

As some day it may happen that an infant must be found, I've got a little list -- I've got a little list, Of youthful seeming meshes whose picture are unsound, And they never would be missed -- they never would be missed. There's a bunch of little babies with their short and chubby limbs -- And all the teenage jailbait posed in textures from The Sims -- Get rid of all the poople who set every thread aflame -- And all the one's who read the posts, they're equally to blame -- Don't tell the users anything, it only gets them pissed -- They'll none of 'em be missed -- they'll none of 'em be missed.

My opinion is that the 'The List' is utter bullshit, pandering to a mythical 'industry standard' that I have yet to see defined =anywhere=. Which industry? Which part of that industry? I do not buy textures sight unseen; I did that -once-....and found the vendor in question had painted the underwear onto the figure, rendering it useless for anything but a static shot as an Sears Catalog model. I understand being careful of the millkids, but a simple offsite link to the texture, with enough watermarking to make it unuseable, would solve that. Claiming that the likes of Miki and GIRL are underaged is ludicrous, and having lived in TN all my life, sounds a lot like: 1) Someone 'got Religion' and is going to use their power to save the heathens, like it or not. 2) A piddly little church group is threatening to call the Southern Baptist Convention on the pervs. 3) A local DA is up for election and is looking for an easy mark to look righteous to the voters 4) There is a delusion that you can somehow get off the Netnanny databases as a pron site once you get onto them (Most of them arrange it so you can't; once tarred, always tarred). And the library access to the store is pretty much a boondoggle, at least here, due to the fact that libraries don't want their IP addresses logged as purchasers of dubious material no matter what it is. 5) It's also very interesting, at least to me, that nine of the lists entries are not DAZ originals....and the ones that are aren't flagship by any stretch. If the plan is to 'cleanse' the site, then just do it. Get it over with so the artists and vendors don't have this pseudo-moralistic Sword of Damocles hanging over their head. The other sites can certainly use the massive influx of talent they would get, and 'rosity could fade into the heat-death of the lowest common denominator, where it seems to want to be.

I don't buy things I can't see, here or at any other site. I find age on polygons laughable, it makes me think of putting age on a block of clay before the final statue is finished. Situations like this and the lack of real 3d info on promos (polycount, wireframe shots, etc), I would suspect is one of the reasons Poser and D/S are constantly bashed by high end 3d artists.

Seems sorta rude to walk into someone's house and >> call them nasty names. And no one has. We have been invited into their store, seen how the store reflects their souls, and called them names. Big difference. This isn't anybody's home. And as you yourself said a few posts later, it isn't a community, in spite of R'osity's smarmy pretense that it is. In a community, one is not a guest but a member, treated with respect and courtesy. We are not neighbors visiting someone's house or the community center, we are customer sheep lined up to be fleeced, and the shearers are, simply enough, not our friends. So lay off the complaints about politeness, Ok? And let's have a rousing chorus of "For we like sheep!" M

Coming from Europe its difficult to understand this discussion. I agree that obvious childporn has to be banned. But most of the figures on the list are supposed to be adults. And the promotional pictures show little more than what a baby sees the first time he sees her/his mother.

"And let's have a rousing chorus of 'For we like sheep!'" - Mickmca

And for a limited time only, all Wellies 50% off in the RMP.

Only a perv would consider Wellies fetish gear.... M

Or a scotsman. Oh... same thing. Never mind. ;)

face it guys. Soon, no characters at all will be allowed to be shown in the nude. The next step is to see any form of genitals banned on 3d generated figures. Rosity can say whatever they want, I believe they just fear to be shut down if an angry mom decides to sue them or if a fucked-up politician takes em on just to buff up his new "campaign for morality and thank you for your vote" plans. Tah's their right to try and prevent it, of course. Not to mention that flaming them for it can lead to a simple ban.

We live in a world of fear, insanity and that's it. We'll be lucky if the word "nudity" ain't banned from the dictionnary within ten years. Wait. maybe ten years is a bit optimistic actually...

the choices rosity makes is not even my concern right now, as rosity is just one place. Still, I believe one line will be drawn in the end by the users/buyers/merchants themselves whatever the community will be, and some might migrate to create their own shops or communities just to get a brake from all the pressure.

I think things on this old planet are really getting out of hands.

Message edited on: 01/01/2006 12:13

Message edited on: 01/01/2006 12:13

I am quite serious here, not at all sarcastic... a practical solution?

Would it be better for the site/store to shut down for a couple months and re-open as a Bible Belt approved "Family Values Site"? With better software maybe and a new IP address or whatever to get past the filters. Just keep a legacy database of previous purchases for download please.

How much would this cost? Would this be easier for people to accept?

Does anyone else have the capital to open a truly viable restriction free non-porn site/store that takes independent vendors on a product test basis to pick up the glamor/pin-up/realism market for "mature" "artistic" "non-porn" use? "R-rated" I guess? Are the motion picture ratings standard and articulated?

I have no idea what money is involved in such things... would Renderosity want to do the spin-off themselves or is the cost totally prohibitive?

Would it be better for the site/store to shut down for a couple months and re-open as a Bible Belt approved "Family Values Site"? Not real practical. In a rough economy, the last thing you want to do is give up 1/6 of your already reduced income.

"Does anyone else have the capital to open a truly viable restriction free non-porn site/store that takes independent vendors on a product test basis to pick up the glamor/pin-up/realism market for "mature" "artistic" "non-porn" use?" Several already exist. Inclusive of Odd Ditty Foundry. Might not have much in place, but that doesn't mean we/they wouldn't. " "R-rated" I guess? Are the motion picture ratings standard and articulated?" They are. Once this current change goes into effect, RO will be able to pick up a PG-13 for the store, and will have and X for the galleries in general. Exciting, isnt it?

The are two ways to deal with dictature, bow your head and kneel as an obedient sheep, or find a way how to survive and there are many ways to do it without any problem. Worst that censorship is the auto-censorship, you start to believe that is censored what is not censored at all.

It is censorship but it is by a privately owned site - they have a right to this and we have agreed that in return for the services offered here, we keep within their terms of service. Not bowing my head means not using the site. When I can buy elsewhere, I do. But all in all, that's just not always possible - many things are only available here. If the merchants choose to sell at other venues, then I will buy from those. Otherwise, there is nought to be done.

I was not refering to members or merchants, I was refering to Renderosity.

Sorry. Far too little sleep and not enough attention. Frustration shared.

stahlratte commented "Make no mistake. They WILL ban nudity from the gallery and from the forums, too, because they have to." and MorriganShadow replied "1. They're not affecting the galleries. 2. The changes to the nudity guidelines within the Renderosity MarketPlace are due to changing trends within the industry and it provides us with a much larger target market." Sounds to me like the death toll of Rosity, after where is it going to end???? I agree with stahlratte after all they dont want to please their current members, and i for one will go if this Big brother attitude moves to such a point. Perhaps they should think about adding an area for us who like it the way it is...or dont they want us????? I will know when my gallery images dissapear, and then so shall i. Perhaps we should all be looking for a new home, that shows that it likes us...

LOL wolf359

I've said it before - I hope they're paying you for the promo pics. I don't recognise the vehicle though, it looks good, could you let us know where and what?

Attached Link: in lightwave format

OT: where could be found/purchased the jinroh like armor you used

Riddokun:

That's the Grim armor by SanctumArt, sold exclusively at his website.

www.sanctumart.com

And before you balk at the price, take a good look through the 45 promo pics on the site to see all you'd be getting.

Actually, it's beginning to look as if what we really -need- is an independant site that does nothing but keep track of where talent has decided to hang hat at. That would effectively deal with the 'ease of shopping' rosity provides (and avoid accusations of business infringement, as the talent that remains here could be pointed to as well). It would have to be done by someone apolitical, who doesn't give a damn about any grudges or old tussles. But that way everyone would come as close to winning as they could.

there's an idea!

QUOTE
What is your opinion of the list?
/ QUOTE

My opinion is articulated and I will try to summarize it in points:

1. My opinion on the whole puritan trend is "3S" that it is sad, sick, and silly.

• Sad, because it is sad to see the distorted vision of morals and ethics that the public opinion of the world's current leader nation's is more and more obviously having. And for us not living in the USA, the fear is that this wave of puritanism may come to us somehow soon, because the USA culture is much influential over most of the world today. So, big fear.
• Sick, because in my opinion, unless there is an explicit sexual or porn reference in images, it is just simply sick to see immorality in a nude image. The sickness is not in the art of the artist, it is in the eye of the censor. Which is to say that the censors ban whatever they recognize as sick in their own sick minds.
• Silly, because to see any age truth in cartoon figures such as Laroo or the Girl, can not be regarded in any other way than silly. And judging age by breast size is also silly: Today I had New Year's lunch with a grand-aunt of mine who is 80 years old and has (and always had) barely the breast size of a skinny 14er. And on the other hand, I remember one summer holiday in 1979 when a girl in our group had two big boobs every one of us males were fantasizing about - and she was 15.

1. I think that blaming this on Renderosity is short-sighted. I am sure that Renderosity does not want to censor, they only want to make better business and they follow the main stream trend because it is obviously more productive. The main trend of morals in the USA do not depend, nor is determined by, Renderosity's choices. So if you hav eto blame this on someone, blame it on the current powers-that-be and on those who voted them in the elections. And try to remember this when you will go to vote for the next elections.
   From the profit point of view, it is obviously more lucrative to lose the sales of two open-minded artists than to lose the sales of twenty narrow-minded barbiedolls handlers. This must be a fact otherwise I am sure that Renderosity admins would not have set such restrictive rules.

2. In all cases, Renderosity is a private venture, they can set any rules they want and no one merchant is obliged to like their rules, i.e. if we don't like the rules we are obviously free to go selling somewhere else.

3. I am afraid that these rules will damage some texture artists much. Warezing the poser products is a long time problem and this is going to make it worse, because getting a warezed copy of a texture will be the only way to properly and thoroughly check a texture set before purchase. More and more people will end up getting a warez copy to see what a texture really looks like, and once they have it, not all of them will have the honesty to get back to the store and buy what they already have on their hard disks.
   Also, we will get more and more after-sale returns and chargebacks, because the new rules will in a way entitle people to claim back their money since they had to "buy blind" important parts of the products. And I am afraid that more and more people will use this as a strategy to get the goods for nothing (because again, once it's on their harddisks, whoever grants us merchants that they will delete them after return?). A strategy that may prove useful for those items they could not momentarily get from warez sources.

Message edited on: 01/01/2006 19:29

I think the problem is not their desire to win over the .001% of the population who despite being reduced to surfing from the library still have credit cards and money to spend. It's not following some "industry standard" that remains (conveniently) undefined. It's not trying to be a poor man's Daz. The problem is, they started out saying they were on thing and now they are trying to morph into another. They catered to one of the most independent, opinionated, (some would say neurotic :-) groups of folks imaginable and said hey, this is a place for you, grow, be creative, build a "community," just don't burn the place down. Now, they've decided that's incompatible with their perfectly legitimate desire to make money...and people are chafing. The schizophrenic status quo is not viable. The attempt to finesse and drag out this issue has resulted in rules which are increasingly illogical with each new iteration. Capitalist apologias notwithstanding, even business should have some logic beyond 'we can, therefore we do.' Anyone who is going to be surprised when the "industry standards" suddenly require all pablum all the time, should retire to a wicker basket now and spare themselves the trauma. If little old Renderotica can have a separate G rated site, one would think that a "premier" site could manage somehow. The economy, by all reports, even non-Fox News ones, seems to be doing fine. Personally, I think it may be less about the extra bucks and more about asserting power. Not to get political but there seems to be a lot of that going on lately among certain classes. The only possible reason I can see for the herky jerky implementation of the new world order here is that they're not sure the Disney model is going to bring in more geld than it loses and they don't want to have to do too big a climb down. So, consider your purchasing options in close consultation with your values. If such consideration leads you to spend money your elsewhere while continuing to avail yourselves of the excellent free services here then I suppose it's a net loss for someone.

little dragon:

i didnt balk at the price, dont start make me saying things i didnt...

if the thing worths the price stated, i wont criticize, i will just blame my purse for not being filled up enough to get it for a while, but it will end up there :)

Anyway, it's for 3ds max, it's not for poser, so i'm a bit out of league here ...

i asked cause i remembered someone (i think taruru from cyobitlabs... we all miss you taruru... at least you dont see how mad the world is going to) made a jinroh lookalike picture and/or armor too already.. so i just wanted to check if it was the same that you textured better, or if there were a new product based on similar look

thanx

ps: and now folks a little joke:

Puritanism is the haunting fear that someone, somewhere, MIGHT be happy :)

Message edited on: 01/02/2006 06:20

So if you hav to blame this on someone, blame it >> on the current powers-that-be This is not about "blame." "Blame" is childish. My mother handled blame appropriately: Jerry [my brother] did it. Well, why didn't you STOP him? Why indeed. This is not about blame; it's about fixing the problem. R'osity doesn't have to do this, any more than anyone else has to participate in totalitarianism. Hell, the consequences here aren't going into a wood chipper or burning at the stake. (Though one of my neocon acquaintances --to stretch that word-- was arguing a while back for grisly public executions as the solution for something or other. Stay tuned, Taliban West.) They choose to go along with it because they care more about profits than principles. Not because they'll go broke if they don't capitulate, but because they can make more money by pandering to the REAL PTB. So show them that's a misconception. >> they're not sure the Disney model is going to >> bring in more geld than... Your post hits each nail deftly on the head. (And much more temperately than mine, but then, Savonarola was more temperate than I am.) A few years ago, my son was with me when I was headed for a WalMart. He was obviously unhappy that I was going in. In fact, he waited in the car, as if I were visiting an adult book store or something equally repellent. When I came back, I told him I didn't "like" WalMart, but their prices were better and I needed something I could only get there (in this case, a brand of dog biscuits). He explained to me why he refuses to spend a nickel in WalMart. Most of his reasons are now more widely known -- their hateful treatment of employees, their appalling record on environmental issues, their vicious contracts with suppliers, their gangsterish handling of local governments, their donations to totalitarian causes (good for business, you know). Their prices are better because they give nothing to the community and take a tiny bit less than others do -- and keep it all for themselves. Great business model; nobody I want in my neighborhood. He was right. I didn't know all those things, but once I did, I refused to shop there again. Haven't been inside one in nearly two years. And the dog doesn't seem to miss the biscuits. Maybe I "needed" them; he didn't. Every so often, someone at work will give me the "I hate Walmart too, but I can't afford not to shop there." The last one is 40, making $70K/year, has no kids, and drives a brand new car. Spare me. I pay an extra few cents a purchase to buy from independent groceries and maintain a membership at CostCo for access to bargains. I don't need to save five cents on a bag of potato chips so badly that I will give a buck to Walmart. Vote with your wallet. R'osity is counting on you to lack the integrity to quit shopping here. Americans pay a lot of lip service to "values" like integrity. Let's see if you actually have any. ...your turn, Mr. Savonarola.... M