child nudity  warning my ass!

if anyone would like to see my work visit my site,or any other poser site but here BIG EYE ROLL

The3dZone

I'm sorry to hear this :(  So many great artists have been pulling their galleries; what a shame :(

EDIT:  I just went to your site and there was some kind of popup or something that was smack in the middle of the page with an age disclaimer as well as a TOU or something and it indicated to "click here to enter", but when I clicked it wanted to download some .exe file. I cancelled.

Was your site hacked?

must be cause they're all child pornographers like I apparently am :glare:

hehe. you were too fast for me. I edited my above post to include something about your site.  Something weird happened when I went there.

hmm,no,the front page of my site looks like this..I just checked it

oops maybe I shouldn't have nekkid snow boy up there rolls eyes again

This is way I'm sticking to posting robot images here and leaving my other works some place else.
I was just at your webpage and saw nothing that I would deem a problem but I guess it's my mind frame. Maybe I'm not seeing whatever anyone else is seeing. Anyway, I'm sorry to hear of your gallery closing.

Cheers,
Micheál

I don't mean to sound defensive, but, 3DZone, no one stated that you were a child pornographer.  We simply stated that an image that you posted was in violation of our Child Image Guidelines.  The character appeared to be young, and wasn't fully clothed.  Which is a violation, which is why it was removed. 

No one here said you can't create those images.  We just can't allow you to post them here.  For what it's worth, it was a beautiful image, but, fair is fair, and whether it's a beautiful image or not, if it's in violation, it is removed.

 

MS

yes MS and that is why I removed the whole gallery,because I only use A3 and most of the time with the DEFAULT FACE like in that image,so it would only be a matter of time before the lot of you removed the rest and banned me for violating the TOS here

and I did not say I was called that,it was a statement of how I feel when I'm told that my images depict nude children thats all.

I also do not expect you to be UNFAIR,it's your policy...keep it,stick to it,I don't care..because I have no gallery here :0)

and thank you for the compliment,it is posted at most of the other poser sites if youd ever like see it again.

Quote - hmm,no,the front page of my site looks like this..I just checked it

That page was under the window that showed up. I couldn't get into your site without clicking the "click here to enter" and accepting whatever terms that window indicated, and clicking the "click here to enter" wanted to download an .exe  The window blocked your "enter" button and remained there even when I adblocked it, which is why I clicked it because I thought it was something you put there.

I can't remember exactly who the window was from. It said something about the site being free because it was paid for by advertising and talked about "screet" or something like that and at the bottom there was a disclaimer about verifying you were 18 or older and then the standard TOU with a "click here to enter".

There were also 3 or 4 ad banners across the top of the page. I wish I could remember what that window said exactly.

wow,really?...what browser are you using? cause I have never seen that..but you can also get there thru the portal page and by pass the enter page all together

http://www.the3dzone.com/3DZPortal/index.php

Acadia, also check your system, to see if you have spyware or malware on your system.  It looks like you've got a hijacker.

I've noticed that most poser sites have members who will complain about aiko images in particular, or anime images in general, because the complainants believe the girls in the images look too young. I never saw your images, hence I dunno, but personally I don't post aiko images here (although I did post 'em at two other sites). in addition, try not to blame the admins here. they only act on complaints from members. if you're trying to blame somebody, then blame the members who complained about your images. if you have a private site, then you can ban those members, but at all these poser sites, those members are gonna be present.

I just want to clarify that, while we do act on members' reports, we also monitor the galleries, and, unless it's a blatant violation, we do run it by the rest of the staff before we remove the images. 

One of the great things about 3D art, especially with the use of morphs, is that we end users can use them in different combinations to create new and individual looking characters.  Unfortunately, with Aiko's body structure, her figure straddles a thin line between "just old enough" and "not quite there yet".  Her facial features do the same.  I know quite a few adults who look underaged, and they get frustrated when they get carded at the bar.  However, the bad thing with 3D art is.........you can't just get a model release form for the model, because they're just a bunch of code.  At least with photography, we can get a model release form to make sure that the model is of age.  We can't do that, unfortunately, with 3d art.

MS

I'm sorry your gallery won't be here anymore - I'll have to make regular visits to your web site to see your images. I love your stuff and don't want to miss it!

Nothing bugs me more than the claim that Aiko looks to young, because it just shows a viewer who has a very distorted perception of women.

I personally consider the claim one step shy of a racial slant, because Aiko looks so much like someone I used to date when we were in our mid-20s living in Korea, heck there's one morph out there of her that looks like my wife did when she was 28.

If a viewers experience with women is so limited that they don't know what Asian women of varying ages look like, I find that troubling.

Aiko is toonish, so I'm not speaking to that, but to the age she seems to show. It is -very- adult.

Aiko is just a 3D model by herself, usable in nearly any manner. And her appearance is easily adult by Asian standards, and even some caucasian, ameri-indiginous, and african women age slow enough to have that few 'facial lines' in their 20s. Aiko characters such as 'Angelica' over at Poser pros are clearly adult and caucasian (a number of women at my graduate school look younger than her).

When this perception that she is a child occurs, it is truly troubling. When it occurs in a moderator it is seriously problematic and casts doubt on their credibility.

Her structure is 'less lined' than figures like V3 and Miki (who doesn't really even look Asian...), and this is not so much a sign of underaged as it is of a well established principle in toon-art.

Read Scott McCloud's Understanding Comics.

In that book he notes how the simplification of the human is a common thing in art across cultures which works to increase identification. The simpler the face, the more it evokes the commonality of human experience. Cartoons (to include anime) use simplified and over-the-top forms intentionally in order to draw in the viewer and cause him/her to place themselves into the position of the protagonist.

It is a very well established principle of art to do this, and it takes a lot of work and skill to know how to do it right. It's seen not just in cartoons, anime, and comics, but also everytime you open a newspaper and flip to the editorial section - the poltical cartoons. these simplify the faces of political personas such as a president not because the paper can't afford to hire a photographer or a classical painter, but because that simplification draws out the 'Character' behind the character.

Aiko's popularity is probably largely driven by her ability to really capture the same part of the eye that is drawn in by 'cartooning'. She has a very emotional face - you see a character in her when you look at her, and she can force 'identification' much better than the more 'liney' faces of other 3D models can.

This is not for age, but for effect of drawing a viewer in.

Even Aiko realistic, even when she actually does look realistic, still retains this. In the same way that when people look at such beautiful women with smooth faces like hers they identify and feel for them by instinct...

And this does not make these women, nor Aiko, underaged. Nor should there be a default assumption that she is such. Such an assumption shows a culturally myopic perspective in the viewer.

anime faces are just exagerated, big eyes are used just to exagerate emotion, not to idicate youth!! it is getting very silly round here seeing innocent images getting pulled just because they use aiko!! there is a huge difference between "nudity" and "pornography", i would fully understand you pulling an image that was pornographic, but pulling every image that has a nude aiko in just doesn't make sense!! i also understand that there is a lot of smutty anime on the net, but there is also a lot of beautiful innocent anime aswell, not to do with sex, but to do with the awkwardness and embaressment of meeting between a girl or boy, or man and woman,and dating and the feelings felt, all quite innocent. i really think the team here would benifit from getting someone onboard that has great experience with anime/manga, because i don't think you're getting it right!! your losing good artists and customers at the same time. i think we are lucky that Michaelangelo,Da vinci, Bouguereau, Raphael,Waterhouse,Ingres,Rubens,Renoir, Boucher,all the Renaissance artists and all the pre-raphaelites, existed before Rendo', as if they were here now you would of banned them all, and then there probally would never of been art at all!!!

Sorry to lose you here, I have been to your site, in the past, today and will be again in the future, don't be a stranger here though k!

Oh and not to stick my neck out to far to get it chopped off....ahem...but FairyWylde allows fairies ;) Wether or not it was a fairy image I don't know but often times......

thankyou,I don't plan to leave Rosity as a member/merchant,just an artist,
 yes it was a Faery and she is still at the Wylde and every other poser site I uploaded her to :0)

We're not pulling images simply because they include a Naked Aiko.
If said Naked Aiko appears to be Not Adult, we will remove it.
It's not about pornography, it is about an addendum to the TOS that has been in place for well over a year.  It was well-advertised, highly debated, and is currently enforced. 
EVERY figure has the ability to be morphed to appear to be childlike.  That I'm aware of (don't have P6 yet, so I could be wrong, 'nother discussion for 'nother thread). 
As I've stated before in other threads, YOU (the artist in general, not pointed at you, Zone) may not have intended the character to be that youthful looking.  But, when they look young to us, and we, as a team, decide that the character is too young, we'll remove it. 
The Child Image Guidelines have been in place for well OVER a year. 
And, I know, faeries are supposed to look young, and be ancient.  I know this.  I love faeries.  However, the TOS are clear on what is and isn't acceptable.  Why do we have to do this?  Too many people planting wings on very VERY young looking models in extremely provocative poses, and saying "but they're faeries!  they're thousands of millenia old!!!"  Plain old abuse of the system.  There are very well-done pieces of fae art that include childlike fae in nude images.  Unfortunately, due to past abuse, we had to get strict, and say that we can no longer accept images of that kind in the galleries.
All we ask is that, if you want to post images with young-looking faeries, please make sure that they are clothed.  Not hidden behind a bush, not under bubbles, etc.  They need to appear to have clothing on. 

Anyway, I really don't want this to turn into an argumentative thread, please.  Zone, for what it's worth, I really love your art.  I don't usually comment, because I don't get much time to do so anymore, but you're welcome to bring your art back here at any time, so long as it fits within the TOS of our site.

MorriganShadow
Poser Mod.

Quote - We're not pulling images simply because they include a Naked Aiko.
If said Naked Aiko appears to be Not Adult, we will remove it.

]

I thought that Renderosity ruled that Aiko was not considered "child". 

The3dZone said that most of their images are done using Aiko in her default state, which means "out of the box", as they said they had used in the offending image which was deemed "child" and removed from the gallery.

So is using Aiko in her default state now against the TOS of this site?

awww well tat stinks to hear but I am looking forward to checking out your stuff at TheArtDoor.

((hugs)) babe.

-EM

Thank you Morrigan,
but I just don't know that I could or should,because obviously I don't know what is "the look" that says overage...lol
this isn't the first image that I was told looked underaged by the staff,that is what is soo darn confusing to me,
my image "pretty in pink" was done almost the same way as the image that got pulled,same face almost same pose,different lighting,wings and hair,

but shoot I think I actually used the same character texture infact...yet it was passed over as tos friendly.so I'm not gonna chance it.
I'm a merchant here and having a gallery is not worth getting banned and not being able to manage my store because a few people have opinions on what age my character is.

I did not mean for this to beat the dead horse again,I just wanted those who have me in their favs to know where my images CAN be seen,I was a little hotheaded at first,but I have sinced calmed down,
my only regret is losing all the wonderful comments that everyone gave to my images over the years,especially the ones for "arms of an angel" tributing the passing of my baby dog kiki,but such is life.

The3dZone

Quote - > Quote - We're not pulling images simply because they include a Naked Aiko.

If said Naked Aiko appears to be Not Adult, we will remove it.

]

I thought that Renderosity ruled that Aiko was not considered "child". 

The3dZone said that most of their images are done using Aiko in her default state, which means "out of the box", as they said they had used in the offending image which was deemed "child" and removed from the gallery.

So is using Aiko in her default state now against the TOS of this site?

Ok, you're putting words where they weren't said.  Nowhere did I say using Aiko in nudes was in violation of the TOS.  I said every character, to my knowledge, can be morphed to appear underaged.  Unfortunately, a character that looks fine at one camera angle can look completely different and way too close (and sometimes over) the line as far as the TOS goes.  That is why it's so tough to gauge age in 3d images; we can't just ask the artist for a model release, like we can with photography.  There is no model release.  All 3d models are just virtual models.  However, when the images take on a likeness of an underaged person, regardless of the base model used, we have to use our discretion as a team to discern whether the image is in violation of our TOS. 
But, if you have an image that you have rendered that you think may be close to the border, feel free to email any of us on staff.  It's always StaffUserName@Renderosity.com.  Mine is MorriganShadow@Renderosity.com.  I'm usually available to review images, and I usually ask a staff opinion (again, unless it's either a blatant TOS violation, or if it's not even an issue). 

Also, to state where that may have been heard.....Those rules were put in place for Marketplace renders, not our gallery.  The Marketplace is a trifle stricter than the galleries, for good reason.  Most of our members use Paypal to purchase, and many merchants receive their payments that way.  If paypal pulled support from this site, thousands of people would lose the ability to purchase goods, and many merchants would lose the ability to receive payments.  So, they got really strict on the young-looking characters.  And, after much debate on the Store Admin side (the regular site staff really have no input on what Store Staff does), they did loosen the reigns a bit, but they are still sticklers for the rules. 

MS

"highly debated"

Yeah- by everybody but those who make and enforce the rules. Don't blow smoke up our ___'s and make it sound like it was a community decision and agreement. It was a decree from on high.

lol- arcady :) your over thinking it- the anime characters were made to be a replacement for the previous bannings of all the milgirl pics. Your ideas and examples equally apply to them.

So many of the 'decency police' are stuck on the 1950's playboy image of 36-24-36 super boob shape as being the only acceptable female form.

If I was female I'd be piss'd at those who are saying (demanding) that you are less then if your not that. limited shape.

Quote - > Quote - > Quote - We're not pulling images simply because they include a Naked Aiko.

If said Naked Aiko appears to be Not Adult, we will remove it.

]

I thought that Renderosity ruled that Aiko was not considered "child". 

The3dZone said that most of their images are done using Aiko in her default state, which means "out of the box", as they said they had used in the offending image which was deemed "child" and removed from the gallery.

So is using Aiko in her default state now against the TOS of this site?

Ok, you're putting words where they weren't said.  Nowhere did I say using Aiko in nudes was in violation of the TOS.  I said every character, to my knowledge, can be morphed to appear underaged.  Unfortunately, a character that looks fine at one camera angle can look completely different and way too close (and sometimes over) the line as far as the TOS goes.  That is why it's so tough to gauge age in 3d images; we can't just ask the artist for a model release, like we can with photography.  There is no model release.  All 3d models are just virtual models.  However, when the images take on a likeness of an underaged person, regardless of the base model used, we have to use our discretion as a team to discern whether the image is in violation of our TOS.

Yes but this attitude is consistantly applied against Aiko images and not others.

There are threads all over the larger poser community from Aiko fans getting their work pulled here for images that are clearly adult in nature to them and to people with any sort of multicultural experience. This is not the first thread over an Aiko pulling of an Aiko that the artist -claimed- was in a default morph.

Quote - "highly debated"

Yeah- by everybody but those who make and enforce the rules. Don't blow smoke up our ___'s and make it sound like it was a community decision and agreement. It was a decree from on high.

You're right.  I said highly debated.  There were a lot of debates, and we stuck firm to our decision.  Yes, it was a decision from the admin.  We announced it.  Members debated both sides.  I see no attempt by me to blow smoke in anyone's orifices.

MS

Attached Link: Child Image Guidelines

> Quote - > Quote - > Quote - > Quote - We're not pulling images simply because they include a Naked Aiko. > > > > If said Naked Aiko appears to be Not Adult, we will remove it. > > > > > > ] > > > > > > I thought that Renderosity ruled that Aiko was not considered "child".  > > > > > > The3dZone said that most of their images are done using Aiko in her default state, which means "out of the box", as they said they had used in the offending image which was deemed "child" and removed from the gallery. > > > > > > So is using Aiko in her default state now against the TOS of this site? > > > > > > > > Ok, you're putting words where they weren't said.  Nowhere did I say using Aiko in nudes was in violation of the TOS.  I said *every* character, to my knowledge, can be morphed to appear underaged.  Unfortunately, a character that looks fine at one camera angle can look completely different and way too close (and sometimes over) the line as far as the TOS goes.  That is why it's so tough to gauge age in 3d images; we can't just ask the artist for a model release, like we can with photography.  There is no model release.  All 3d models are just virtual models.  However, when the images take on a likeness of an underaged person, regardless of the base model used, we have to use our discretion as a team to discern whether the image is in violation of our TOS. > > Yes but this attitude is consistantly applied against Aiko images and not others. > > There are threads all over the larger poser community from Aiko fans getting their work pulled here for images that are clearly adult in nature to them and to people with any sort of multicultural experience. This is not the first thread over an Aiko pulling of an Aiko that the artist -claimed- was in a default morph.

I'm not going to argue the point much further than this.  The simple fact is that, we do, at great length discuss many images that are removed (other than, as I've said, I think 3 times so far in this thread, maybe 2, blatant TOS violations of any sort) before we remove them and send a warning.
And, you know, I know that there are discussions going on elsewhere regarding this (and other) issues going on at Renderosity.  I know that every single decision that we make as staff are going to be argued against by at least one member, because there's no such thing as pleasing everyone.  Some people are happy about some decisions, some people not so much.  That's not going to make us change the rules, and, if a model in an image has the appearance of being a person that is Not Adult, and they appear in any way nude (according to gender, of course...girls need shirts on, boys can wear swim trunks without shirts, babies can be in diapers only) we will remove them and the artist will receive a warning.  That is not going to change, at least not any time soon.  And, unfortunately, we staff members have to decide whether or not a model appears underage. 

MS

Why even bother defending it then? You admit a refusal to take a more open and reasoned approach. If community input means nothing, then just shut the thread or stay away - if moderators refuse to listen, why get in the middle of our debates / discussions?

You keep attempting to side track this into some abstract about child nudity, without being willing to demontrate a why in any specific way or over specific works.

Not every decisions will get debated. Just the ones that are biased, unfair, or seem unusually selective against certain types of people / appearances.

This is not an objection to the child nudity TOS - that is a wholly separate issue, and you're merely trying to sidetrack this into that, and claiming it is us beating a dead horse...

This is about Aiko - and the way she's getting 're-classified' in an under the table sort of way, by those who clearly have a standard that says that only over-endowed bodies and overly-defined faces make for an adult female. With a standard like that, yes, it becomes ethnocentric. Is there anyone on that decision panel who is Asian? Or of a small and thin build / frame?

With that, I'm out of here for, hopefully, the next day or so... I need to cool down before I start saying too much of the truth.

Quote - This is about Aiko - and the way she's getting 're-classified' in an under the table sort of way, by those who clearly have a standard that says that only over-endowed bodies and overly-defined faces make for an adult female. With a standard like that, yes, it becomes ethnocentric.

With that, I'm out of here for, hopefully, the next day or so... I need to cool down before I start saying too much of the truth.

It just seems strange to me that Aiko out of the box was deemed "not child" and is ok to have nude in the MP, where the rules are apparently stricter because of PayPal requirements, but that same figure out of the box is demed "child" or "too young" to be nude in the gallery.

Aiko out of the box is either "child" or not;  "pick one" and stick to it and stop contradicting policy and confusing the members here. 

We shouldn't have to run our images by moderators prior to posting them in our gallery if we are using a figure that is deemed "adult", like Aiko has been, and as such the site mods shouldn't be questioning images that are made using figures deemed "adult".

The good news, though, is that now all those perverted pedophiles who would otherwise be lurking around Renderosity, can get Poser 5 and Aiko for free and satisfy their prurient interests without troubling the good folks at PayPal.

 

<,'))%%%<<

What was the name of the image, as listed on your site?

Oh crap, not another one...

This is getting a little ridiculous. You post one aiko image thats slightly nude and its removed, yet people can post photographs in the gallery of themselves, grabbing their naked parts. Honestly, I cant see why anyone would bother getting their rocks off on aiko stuff when theres a gallery full of REAL perverted images on here. Real fair.... and I never see those images gettin removed. IMHO Aiko isnt even human, let alone a child... shes anime - a freakin cartoon. Now Im all for not allowing the mill kids to be nude, coz they are childlike, but aiko is a bit over the top methinks.

I would just like to know how one decides what age a 3D model is?? It is pretend, isnt it?? o.O

Attached Link: Child Image Guidelines

Since age is difficult to identify with 3D images, this will be at the discretion of the Renderosity team.

We cannot state that Default Aiko is either over or under age. If you put her in pigtails, a school uniform, and use a very young and fresh looking texture, she's going to look like a child. Most of the time, she appears adult - hence there are hundreds (probably thousands actually) of images in the gallery with nude Aikos.

If a nude character is perceived by the majority of reviewing staff members as underage, then it will be removed. If the majority feel it's over-age, then it stays.

Small boobs are not  an automatic age-defining characteristic. We consider the whole character - not  just her cup size.

Well thats good to know. Ive read the child nudity guidelines, but it doesnt go into great detail... and I think you guys should add to it what you go on to make the decision. I think alot of people wouldnt cross the lines if they were more clearly defined. I know of people who have done alien type renders of Aiko, and also nude renders of aiko as well (clearly older versions) but were reluctant to post them in fear of them being pulled

And what about the girl?? Do the same things go for her too??

So if I wanted to post a nude render of Aiko with a ponytail, I'll need to give her built-in flotation devices capable of raising the Titanic, and wrinkles, just to have a chance that she isn't deemed "under-age" and pulled?

Hey guys, as I say, it's got to be determined individually.
I wear a ponytail and I'm 33 ;-)
So it depends on the overall look. As Jeni said earlier, you can email or site mail a team member and we'll be happy to look it over before posting, if you're concerned it might look underage.

Sometimes we get so close to our creations that it's hard to be objective about them, you know?

The GIRL is again determined by individual cases. I know her name refers to a young woman/child (depending on which dictionary you use) but again we review individual images and make a decision.

It's difficult to quantify how we decide if a character looks too young. Given the huge range of different physical types in the world, we can't get too scientific. You won't find us sitting there with a pair of calipers saying "Ah-ha! The head is more than 15% of the total height, therefore this character is a child!" - because that wouldn't help with toony type characters, or characters meant to depict halflings, or people with dwarfism.

(It would surely make things easier and quicker if we did, though!)

thanks Morriganshadow for mentioning the paypal issue, if that was the basis for the decision about aiko then that makes a bit of sense anyway! guess we need to bombard paypal with our opinions!! was curious to know whether if you hadn't converted the galleries over to the same server as the marketplace whether that would of been a get-around for this issue, so that they would of been happy that their business wasn't being carried out on a site with "childlike" nudity!!

Was also curious to know  whether if i did a Renaissance-style picture, with nude adult and children alike, in a totally none sexual context!! whether if i "Raphaeled" them (paint loin-cloths over noody-bits) whether that would be acceptable, if i made such an image i would send it to admins to ok or not first, but wanted to know whether that is acceptable or whether that sort of image would always be denied!! i ask because you mentioned that they have to appear to have clothes on, but in a renaissance style i couldn't really use jeans and t-shirt!!! my first picture in my gallery(about a year ago) is a renaissance style piccy with two child onlookers in the foreground  but when i made it i put t-shirts and shorts on them because i was worried it could get pulled (even though if they had been nude you wouldn't of been able to see anything) but it felt weird doing that as it goes against all my training and beliefs( pose, form, and lighting were substituted for censorship)

I understand policy is policy,but can you see my confusion at all here?

I guess this is a last straw of sorts. This place is such a swamp of polite racism and blustering neocon fundamentalism I'm starting to feel like I need a shower after I drop by. The PTBs are welcome to Focus on the Family, to their notion that naked children are obscene, to their "ideals" of feminine beauty that just happen to be pneumatic white bread, to their pandering to violence and sadism and misogyny (Puritan cultures get a kick out of torturing women; how interesting).

What a world. Oh wait. It's September!!!
M

Yep! I see your confusion. All are obviously the same figure.

We all know that Millenium Kids figures are not allowed to be nude, semi-nude or anything but child-like in images here.  Yet there is a great deal of controversy about Aiko.

As I said earlier, Aiko out of the box in her default state is either "child" or "not child", and they need to pick which one it is!  This "at the discretion of the site staff" is clearly ambiguous and is total bs IMHO.

I really enjoy rendering with Aiko and love to make faeries with her, but I'm freaked out about the thought of ever posting a remotely erotic/scantly clad  image with that figure or anything short of fully clothed, because personally I don't see any consistency where decisions on what is "child" or "not child" where this figure is based.

They need to sit down and decide what category Aiko falls into, so that we as members know what we are dealing with and not get hit with a warning or ban stick because our personal judgment  on what an image made with an adult based figure looks like differs from the personal judgment of the site staff.

I would be interested in seeing the results of what a random  member focus group thinks about anonymously submitted images that were deemed "child" and removed from the gallery.

the bottom figure is not Aiko by the way,it's a free independent Japanese figure

I notice that now, the chin in the bottom one is more triangular and the eyes are different.  Regardless though,  to me one doesn't look any older or younger than the others.

Something just occurred to me.

From what I am getting from  Karen's  and MoriganShadow's posts is that the decision of "child" image is based purely on the subjective opinions of the site staff.

Is there no objective checklist  in place that the site staff use to evaluate these things or is it just based purely on "personal opinion"?  As a nurse when working with patients we have to use a great deal of  personal judgment, but we also have to validate it and we do that by relying on a list of key factors based on certain conditions in order to backup our "opinions".

I know for most site "staff" here, that they are helping out purely on a "voluntary" basis. However, that shouldn't preclude decisions being made on a tangible, fair basis.

I'd be interested in hearing what each site staff individual uses as their "personal guide" in determining "child" where an image is concerned.

Personal opinion is really meaningless, and not fair to the masses here.

Decisions should be based on "objective" findings; tangible things not "opinions".

An objective checklist could be something along the lines of:

1. Pose
2. Face
3. Skin Texture
4. Hair Style (styles are not really age specific)
5. Clothing
6. Environment
7. Breast size (I was 36C when I was 12 years old. My cousin who is 41 and has had 3 kids is nearly completely flat chested, so breast size is not indicative of age)

With each of those items the site staff needs to look at and evaluate what about the image gives the impression of "child"

I would venture a guess that most members here post images in their gallery in good faith, and to have someone tell them something along the lines of "in our personal opinion the image is 'child' and has been removed and you are officially warned/banned/etc" is just not fair!

With an objective checklist  the person can be advised what objectively it is about the image  that gives the impression of "child", and not just simply told that they are in violation of the TOS   because of personal opinion of site staff.

found this on beauty check,pretty interesting...

Babyfaceness

Research on facial attractiveness has pointed out that the presence of childlike facial features increases attractiveness. These are: 

• Large head 
• Large curved forehead 
• Facial elements (eyes, nose, mouth) located relatively low 
• Large, round eyes 
• Small, short nose 
• Round cheeks 
• Small chin

Interesting link!

My results:  30%, 40%, 40%, 50%, 40%

though not being here all that long, after reading/following this for the last couple of days it is apparent that this subject is a loooong running difference of opinion.

so renderosity's rules say "no nude kids", get over it. unless, that is all that you create (nudie kids) then you should be able to work around it. besides, they (renderosity) do have other peps that they have to cater to as well (paypal). would you rather have renderosity say, "to hell with the rules print anything you want!" and have sponsers and/or cooperating identities pull their support? you would lose a lot more than a couple of nudie pics if that happened. as much as we have to straddle a line so does renderosity...you are just seeing your own viewpoint.

as to saying that, "the moderator should stay out of the thread and let us discuss this"...i have a feeling that "if" the moderators "did not" chime in on this thread then there would be something along the lines of, "how come nobody from renderosity is saying anything about this!" ahh, the old damed if you do, damed if you don't scenario.

though the arts have generally been a liberal society artisit's still have to conform to the wishes/wants of the peps hiring them and/or purchasing their products. if you want no controls over you whatsoever, that's the beauty of the web...there are lot's of other places that will.

however, it does appear that renderosity has to make a final determination on the aiko character and weather or not the "out of the box" is acceptable or not. again, this will be a judgement call on their part since there is no way for them to determine weather or not the pic they are looking at is "out of the box". but, a yea or nay should be stated for finality.

art is a very personal thing and when others say something, govern and/or control our art it can become personal, hence; this thread.

Quote - Hey guys, as I say, it's got to be determined individually.
I wear a ponytail and I'm 33 ;-)

Well, whatever you do, don't post any nudie pics of yourself! <j/K>

Quote - Hey guys, as I say, it's got to be determined individually.
I wear a ponytail and I'm 33 ;-)

i've got you beat by 13 years...so that means i'm either way ahead of the curve or so far behind it's not funny. lol!

noted

Maybe you should all put in a "All persons despicted are 18+" disclaimer, like they do in some of the H manga they import ;-)

And my "Babyface" results were 50, 40, 30, 20, 20.  Hm... I think I'll study their results and adjust my characters accordingly ;-D

Matt