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.

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