Quote - I just want to state for the record that we never ever received a report on the said image regarding the "violence" content, that never came up. It was due to the reasons stated, the underage appearance is why it came up for review in the first place and the reason for the removal.

 

I think, if I read Primal's post correctly, as well as the others in this thread, that the image was reported based on "underage nudity" but that the actuall reason the person choose to report said image in the first place is that the title and redend condition of A3's posterior in some way reminded them of personal abuse they had suffered in the past.

One might speculate, and it is ONLY speculation that the person in question choose to report the image on a "underage nudity" basis because they believed, not without precident, that the image would be far more likely to be removed on that basis then if they reported on the basis of the implied spanking and/or title, even though this, if you wish to take Primal's testimony at face value, appears to have been the underlining motive.

Is it possible, had this person not reported the image, that someone else might have complained on the basis of "underage nudity" at a later time?  Maybe.  

Was the image justifiably removed by the Renderousity Staff based purely on the "underage nudity" completly ignoring the issues of title and implied spanking content?  That's not for me to say.  As has been said, the appropiate staff members got togeather, voted, removed the image, issued a warning (later withdrawn) etc.  When all is said and done one must rely on the judgement of this body of individuals to make such decisions, and abide by them even if disagreeing personally.

My point, once again, is that all of this could have been avoided had the individual in question contacted Primal by PM and asked that the image be removed on the basis of the title and implied A3 spanking, rather then going the rout that they did which resulted in this whole unpleasant situation. I believe Primal would, as he has said, have volentarilly removed said image on that basis, without objection.

And I have to say, Primal is a far more forgiving indivdual then I.  I'd probably be quite upset about it actually if someone poped in to say, "Terribly sorry about the whole 'underage nudity' thing, I was actually upset about... etc. but I didn't think they'd take it down for that so I used this instead"

What I find most disturbing is that the indivdual did not even bother to contact Primal first to voice the concern.  Also that the indivdual choose to report it on a different basis then what they were actually upset about.

Lemme dumb it down a bit.  You guys remember the South Park ep where the kids all tell the cops their parents molested them so they'll be taken away, basicly so they can go see a concert and then hang out without any parents around?

It's kinda like that.  Their parents didn't molest them, they just wanted to get  rid of them.

So in conclusion blah blah blah, blah blah blah blah blah.  Blah.  ^^