Does anyone else think the TOS is too restrictive for an art site? For example, there is a series of very good pictures in the  rosity gallery which portray the horrors of rape, No I'm not giving a link, Now under the TOS,

(Posting Unacceptable Images or Writing Themes:

• No Rape [actual or implied]

this is not allowed. Also, there is some great art, modern and classical that would not be allowed here while been entirly acceptable for viewing in public galleries all over the world.

I personally dont.

Consider that the TOS has to be applied equally to all users.  If you allow an "artistic" rape scene, how do you stop a straight porn rape ?

I also think that as a member here  you have promised to uphold the TOS, so if you know of a violation , I believe you are obligated to report it .

I think you'll be largely on your own with this one friend!

The site is better for having the TOS IMVHO because it stops evil sick people posting about horrors in life that are all too real to the people who have to endure them!

And what markschum said, if you know of a violation then report it, I have done in the past and I will in the future, it's what keeps this community great!

other sites are even more restrictive, especially in regard to kiddie porn. this site is more restrictive about violence against women than other sites, which is o.k. with me, but I have "no violence" checked in my gallery options, so I get a "restricted content" thumbnail when a b-t-k image comes up. my feeling is that they should be allowed to post such images (as long as I'm not forced to look at 'em) so they don't feel the urge to do the same things to actual women, as opposed to doing it to computer models intended to represent women.

I think mikefres should post the link and then at least we know what we are talking about.

Here is a link to "evil sick people posting about horrors in life "

http://www.nationalgallery.org.uk/cgi-bin/WebObjects.dll/CollectionPublisher.woa/wa/largeImage?workNumber=NG38&collectionPublisherSection=work

I guess this image wouldn't be allowed in the renderosity gallery

Some formatting problems here. Text is running into the sidebar on the right (on my puter with Firefox). Not seen that before..

EDIT:...but now it's OK since the screen refreshed...puzzling  :/

Try Renderotica, they'd love to have you!

And if there truly are images portraying what you perceive to be rape, then I'll suggest the moderator of that forum/gallery is doing an extremely piss-poor job at upholding the TOS if they've been notified and have done nothing about it.  And if you're talking the Poser gallery, I'm having difficulty in believing your claim.

There's an artist in the 2D gallery that has posted at least 2 images with "rape" in the title that I saw yesterday, not hard to find if you search and yes they have been reported!

You guys are remarkable. I always thought artists were open minded and prepared to be challenged but without noing anything about an image and the artist you are prepared to condem it.

Terra dreamer I guess you think that the Rape of the Sabine Women which Lampy posted a link to should be only viewable at Renderotica?

Also, TerraDreamer and Miss Nancy, there is more to art than Poser and not all artists are men.

Sorry I brought the subject of art up perhaps you should all return to dressing up your dolls, or not, in the case of some "Wet Knickers" fantasies.

Mikefres,

Please do not insult people simply because they do not share your opinion.

Thank you,

Karen
Renderosity Staff

? sorry Karen I don't understand. My above respnse is a referal to things that were said above. No insults. I feel very strongly about violence against women and the pictures I'm referring too are an artists attempt to come to terms with such behaviour. The point I'm making is that under the restrictive TOS this is not allowed.

The TOS is there because the owners of the site wish it to be that way, there are many art sites out there on the web that cater for "other" types of images and it's a free world last time I looked.

If you don't like the TOS here than go somewhere where you do, at the end of the day the owners have the right to set the TOS as they see fit and if you or anyone else doesn't like it they don't have to come here!

End of discussion!

"...perhaps you should all return to dressing up your dolls..."

This is what I referred to.

Thank you for refraining from further insults.

Karen
Renderosity Staff

Well if Poser is not dressing up dolls I don't know what is :) But sorry if anyone was offended.

Hey thefixer
 your gallery looks better now

What's your point mikefres, have the bottle to come out and say what you mean, not speak in riddles!

apology accepted, mike. check my gallery here - there's no poser stuff in it :lol: apparently your point is still unclear, as you seem to be arguing not only with those who disagree with you, but also with those who agree with you. my opinion is that nobody is harmed if all of the below are true: 1. nobody is forced to look at a b-t-k pic 2. the b-t-k pic is not a photo of an actual human 3. there are no legal technicalities, e.g. copyright or trademark violations 4. the image is not a blatant TOS violation

quote:Terra dreamer I guess you think that the Rape of the Sabine Women which Lampy posted a link to should be only viewable at Renderotica? :endquote

Actually , at the moment Rotica does not allow any rape pics at all. Everything non-consentual has been removed from the galleries.

As has been said , this is not a public site , it is a privately held business and can require any rules it likes. There are other sites with fewer restrictions.

No-one's yet pointed out that Rubens'  Rape of the Sabine Women does not actually depict anybody being raped. It could be a portrayal of a 17th Century college-student party if we weren't given the title. So it could be posted in the galleries here, I guess.

fraid not pearce. in the rubens painting of the sabine women there is a child which obviously has a naked breast you cant see it but it is definietly unclothed on the right side of its torso.  said child resides on the left hand side of the painting about two thirds of the way up. it's clinging to a mother or big rubenesque sister.

billy

Quote - Does anyone else think the TOS is too restrictive for an art site? For example, there is a series of very good pictures in the  rosity gallery which portray the horrors of rape, No I'm not giving a link, Now under the TOS,

(Posting Unacceptable Images or Writing Themes:

• No Rape [actual or implied]

this is not allowed. Also, there is some great art, modern and classical that would not be allowed here while been entirly acceptable for viewing in public galleries all over the world.

i think the tos per say is as reasonable as can be expected for a site that has to try and cater to a multitude of genre and poeple. it isn't a psecialised artsite such as renderotica or some of the others. as for the sabine woman which for me was one of rubens best works.....if you can paint that well you won't i assure you want to put it in a redorosity gallery.  you have to remember that this isn't an art museum.  whilst i have  to admit that some pics such as you mention get through the net..._(modding has to be a pissy job to do at the best of times.) i have been know to disagree with two sets of tos and how some of the tos is implimented. that said on the whole i still have to give em

9 and 1/2 out of ten. it's a vast site and can't be too easy to police. i would never give an url to get something removed though if it was of child porn  i'd feel duty bound to do so.

billy

I'm fine with the TOS here for the most part. It's a bit inconsistent for some things like the age of figures in images, but at least the staff were open minded enough to listen to us and are no longer going to be giving automatic warnings/bans on images where the figure's age is debatable.

Unfortunately there are people in this world that have no concept of limits or self control. It's with those types of people in mind that there are laws and rules and things like TOS on private websites.

Everyone needs guidelines and limits, it's what helps us keep order.

I abhor censorship for the most part.  To me censorship takes away the rights of one group. I firmly believe that if I don't want to look at or listen to something, I can do one or all of the following:

1. Turn the channel;
2. Put the book/magazine/paper down;
3. Leave the area.

And I do that when needed.  However, it's also my right to be able to go to a place  that is within my comfort zone where I don't have to do the above in order to not be subjected to things that I do not wish to view/hear.  For me that place is Renderosity, Daz and a few other sites in the poser community. Also, this isn't an "adult" only site. There are people of all ages getting into online graphic communities because they are interested in art. Given the fact that there are members here under the age of 18 years, I think Renderosity is pretty liberal with their TOS.  They could easily clamp down and say no nudity at all. However, I don't see them doing that because it would be impossible to sell body textures if the customer couldn't see fully what they were buying.

For those that want to see violence and rape and porn, that's entirely their right, and there are sites that cater specifically to those individuals.  At those sites you have the freedom to post what you want, under the TOS of their website, and you won't have people in your face telling you what a deviant they think you are for liking that kind of art/music etc.

There are stores, websites, television and radio channels with everyone in mind.  If you don't want to be privy to a particular genre of art/music, then don't go to places that make you feel uncomfortable; look for places that are more in tune with your own morals/values/limits.

NOTE: I used the word "you" in the general sense and it's not directed to any one individual.