So let's see here (this might be somewhat tangential)...

The original nudity/violence filters completely removed images containting such from the gallery view for people who had those filters enabled.  When the site switched over, the nude/violent images were no longer removed from display, they just had their thumbnail replaced with a "content advisory" thumb, since many of the thumbnails contained the nudity/violence in them.  They also added visible disclaimer tags for nudity below images (they already existed for violence).

Now, nudity and violence are banned from thumbnails.  We are also banned from using the "content advisory" thumb ourselves, because the administration wants us to provide an "accurate depiction" of the image therein.  So...if there is no longer any nudity or violence in the thumbnails, and the filters no longer remove the nudity/violence containing images from the gallery views...and we, the artists, cannot use the "content advisory" thumb ourselves b/c of the previous accuracy restrition...what is the purpose of the auto "content advisory" thumbnail in the first place?  Are we assuming that one disclaimer tag is not enough for people who don't want to see nudity/violence and that they need two?  Whether or not an image contains violence or nudity, it will not be shown to users on the thumbnail.

P.S. Stacey, I'm sorry that you're disappointed by my view on what will be coming down the road relating to PR doublespeak, but I can only speak from my own past experiences.  I don't believe you have any duplicity in stating that you have no plans to eradicate nudity altogether from the site, but I don't believe that any of you are willing to go out onto the limb to proclaim that it will never happen.

¤~Giolon~¤

¤~ RadiantCG ~¤~ My Renderosity Gallery ~¤