Just one more stupid rule

basically you are saying that I have to do 2 pictures instead of just 1 straight render. 

dlblue.....I have nudes in the gallery.  Yet, most of my thumbs do not show the nudity (out of long time respect for others just browsing.....NO RULE....courtesy.)  Try cropping around the eyes.  If you can achieve a good facial expression in your render....ie, no vacant stare.....eyes can attract quite well.  It is not creating another render for the thumb...simply cropping it.

I understand that folks are angry.  In a great part, I feel because there ARE those loathsome folks who complain about this, that, and the other in the galleries, and, often keep nagging until they get their way.  I certainly hope those folks are prepared to make some awesome renders to take up the slack of all who may leave over this.  

I like the new rule, since I've been following it for a long time.  I still think a Pinup only gallery....(all software) could have nudes, and would cut down on some of the Posers rendered in other modelling apps, posted to, errrr.....say....the Lightwave gallery, and so annoying to the modellers, etc.  I think this is a really good solution.  You know if you go to the pinup gallery you will be viewing nude thumbs....the other galleries, no.

How is a pinup gallery going to work. All nude art is not pinups. Unless you are suggesting da Vincis "Man of Vitruvio", which has just been banned from this site, is a pinup. The easiest way to ban tasteless nude pictures, of course, would be to ban Poser :)

Unless you are suggesting da Vincis "Man of Vitruvio", which has just been banned from this site, is a pinup.

Well, he could think of it as "beefcake", and, put it there.  Or....he'd have to go through the trouble of making a seperate thumb.

What's the difference between "pinups" and "fantasy"?

I just got my second image pulled after reading thru all this and i didnt see anything that said you couldnt post words in a thumbnail except for the word nudity or censored ..Mine said "Ridiculous thumbnail rules applied"..

"Ridiculous thumbnail rules applied"..

I saw that....was a cow.

I tend to stay out of the forums on most sites because debates usually go
ballistic after awhile... :o)
No nude thumbnails in the galleries will not  mean that it is the end of all life
on Earth.
3D Commune and PoserPros have had a no nude thumbnails policy for awhile.
I suppose Daz does as well, but I don't post there and it doesn't matter to me anyway.
To me the no more thumbnai policy makes no difference as I never posted nude thumbnails
in the first place because I rarely make a nude render.
I don't have anything against nudity or people who render nude images.

When we upload images, we have to tag them with an advisory if the image warrants
such an advisory.
I personally don't think thumbnails need to show bare asses,  areolas and nipples.  
If it's flagged as nudity and /or violence one would assume that is what the image is about.
Some may see this as a form of censorship, but it seems to be more of a standard
thing as far as gallery posts are concerned on other sites.
Also, from the administration perspective, their case about the nude thumbnails and their
online publications would be seen as a problem that could be easily overcome by
not allowing any more nude thumbnails.
I had an image temporarily suspended yesterday due to a thumbnail issue.  I found it
a tad unusual, but I sent another one that was acceptable and moved on.
(I made the deleted thumbnail my avatar)

I am a very, very, very bad man . . . :o)

That was  my 2 cents Canadian and I'm not looking to debate the issue. :o)

Quote - How is a pinup gallery going to work. All nude art is not pinups. Unless you are suggesting da Vincis "Man of Vitruvio", which has just been banned from this site, is a pinup. The easiest way to ban tasteless nude pictures, of course, would be to ban Poser :)

What? da Vincis "Man of Virtuvio" has not been "banned" from this site, lol??? Not sure how you are misunderstanding that. It was removed due to the fact that we do not allow nudity without a non nude thumb. On the front page article members that do not wish to view nudity would just click right into that nudity without knowing. That is much different that "banned" from the site.

Yes it was a picture of a cow.

"It was removed due to the fact that we do not allow nudity without a non nude thumb."
There was and still is a  non nude thumb that led to a page with "Man of Vitruvio" on it,  Not sure what you are saying here apart from the pedantic difference between "banned" or "removed" from this site.
So what am I misunderstanding?

I tried to wade through this entire mess...but I am still curious about something.

Am I allowed to use Renderosity's default nudity thumbnail, for my own work? Or is that against some TOS rule as well? And if I'm not allowed to use it...can someone please explain to me exactly why I can't.

Thanks

The "default" nudity thumbnail"? I'm not sure what you mean? 

The "Content Advisory" icon that only shows up for members that have their nudity filter turned on as they don't want to see NUDITY at all?

Yes Stacey...that's the one. May I use that as my own thumbnail for my nude images? If not, can you explain to me the reason why I can't?

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.

Quote - 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.

Okay the filter is for members/visitors that do not want to see ANY nudity at all. Meaning they see that "Content Advisory" icon so they have no desire or want to see ANY nudity and they can easily avoid this by turning their filter on so that any images tagged will have that icon. That is what the nudity filter does now  and the only time it should be used is system generated based on the filter being on

The reasons for the non nude thumbnails is not for members that don't want to see nudity at all. There were several factors involved in coming to this decision so you have to look at them all not just say "well if members dont' want to see nudity, then turn the filter on".. Its not just about that, I've said that numerous times but everyone continues to just zero in thinking that is the only issue here. Its not.   The newsletter, the professional look of the site as a whole, the consistency between the areas, the Today's top page, etc all were factors.  Over 90% of the membership here have their filters turned off so can you imagine how horrible the galleries would look if everyone used the "censored" type thumbs saying "Nudity Inside" or "Content Advisory" (when I turn my nudity filter on and see how it looks with all the Content Advisory icons since there are so many images containing artistic nudity/violence it looks horrible)?  If members are creative with their thumbs giving some indication of your artistic abilities in a thumbnail then the chances of someone clicking to view your image are greater (and yes this can successfully be accomplished without showing the nudity, I see it everyday) but if you have a Content Advisory generic icon or a 'Nudity Inside" text, I can almost guarantee that the views will decrease because there is no indication of your ability as an artist.

As for the 'banning of nudity' on the site, as I stated we have never discussed this and I dont' see that ever happening because we understand the beauty of artistic nudity.  I can't see into the distant future any more than anyone else so that is why I say what I know to be the exact truth and that its not been discussed, we have NO plans for changing allowing nudity in any way so what more to you want me to say? Its not "PR" talk, its the simple truth.  I can say on a personal opinion level if you ask me to give my personal thoughts on whether this could ever happen since I am on the admin team and know how everyone on staff feels, I would say No I don't ever see a banning of artistic nudity on this site. I can 100% say that this new thumbnail rule is definitely not a first step in banning nudity on the site, there are no underlying ulterior motives to move toward a non nude site with the implementation of this new policy. 

I'm sure no matter what I say or how I say it, someone will twist my words, pull words out of the context of the whole discussion, etc and make something there that isn't. 

Well, that clearly written and concise account does it for me. Thank you Stacey.

Sigh, I suppose i'll just have to get back to work on my theory of how Renderosity, the Iluminati and house cats are working hand in hand in paw towards world domination.

Stacey, I read what you said, and I'm not sure if you ever answered my question. Am I allowed to use the same icon (or make a similair one of my own) that Renderosity uses? If not...what is the reason? Is that icon against TOS rules?

I know you said it would look horrible (and image what all those people have to go through, that have their filters on)...but that's not the same as an answer.

Thanks for the great reply, Stacey.  Unfortunately what you say about twisting words and context will always be true.  I can also certainly see the hesitation of having censored thumbnails flood the gallery (it would kind of defeat the purpose of banning nude/violent thumbs to obtain a more pofessional look).  While you addressed nearly everything, I think the wording of my question about the filters wasn't quite accurate enough:

Given that the filters don't actually remove any images from people's views ever since the site change over (they still appear, just with a replaced thumbnail), what is the point of the filters anymore at this point because nobody will ever at any time see nudity/violence in the thumbnails b/c of the new rule?  Do you see what I'm getting at?  All nude/violent images already have a warning tag below them, and since the thumbnails can't show the nudity or violence anymore, the "content advisory" thumbnail & filters seems redundant, no?  They have almost no effect on what the end user will see, except when the filter is enabled, users no longer get to see that tasteful preview of our "artistic ability" (and the image is already flagged for nudity underneath the thumb anyway).  Everybody, regardless of filter setting, will always see the listings for images with nudity/violence and nobody will ever see actual nudity or violence in the thumbnail for those images.  So what purpose do the filters serve anymore?   (Tangential, I know)

I haven't really given my opinion of the new rules other than the fear of more restricions coming down the road, and on the whole I'm fine with it.  The exception is the "no buttock cleft" (at all)rule.  This is something that is allowed to be shown on broadcast television during primetime.  That pretty much rules out any thong underwear if you want a pretty posterior in your thumbnail (especially if that's the focus of the image).  Half of Aery Soul's clothing, your vendor of the year, could no longer be used in thumbnails because of this.  They mostly use thong underwear with extremely low cut skirts or pants.  I find that kind of ironic.  "This is our most outstanding, popular vendor and we're giving them our site's highest honor.  However, you can no longer show 50% of their clothing in your thumbnails!". :ohmy:

I fear my presence in this thread is starting to reach the redundancy point, but I've tried to keep my questions pointed and respectul.  I'm not here to bash anybody or "fight the man" or anything.  I'm just merely trying to get to further understanding of the new rules, their purpose, and understand the seeming inconsistencies.  I hope I've accomplished this in as mature a manner as I tried to do.

I think after listening to you that have mentioned this that if you want to use the generic Renderosity "Content Advisory" icon then we will allow that.  

Giolon,

I appreciate your comments and the way that you make them more than you'll know:)

I do understand about the nudity filters really not being "effective" so to speak any longer. I will have a discussion with the admin team/programmers about this.  I'll let you know.

Stac

Quote - > Quote - 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.

 

Okay the filter is for members/visitors that do not want to see ANY nudity at all. Meaning they see that "Content Advisory" icon so they have no desire or want to see ANY nudity and they can easily avoid this by turning their filter on so that any images tagged will have that icon. That is what the nudity filter does now  and the only time it should be used is system generated based on the filter being on

The reasons for the non nude thumbnails is not for members that don't want to see nudity at all. There were several factors involved in coming to this decision so you have to look at them all not just say "well if members dont' want to see nudity, then turn the filter on".. Its not just about that, I've said that numerous times but everyone continues to just zero in thinking that is the only issue here. Its not.   The newsletter, the professional look of the site as a whole, the consistency between the areas, the Today's top page, etc all were factors.  Over 90% of the membership here have their filters turned off so can you imagine how horrible the galleries would look if everyone used the "censored" type thumbs saying "Nudity Inside" or "Content Advisory" (when I turn my nudity filter on and see how it looks with all the Content Advisory icons since there are so many images containing artistic nudity/violence it looks horrible)?  If members are creative with their thumbs giving some indication of your artistic abilities in a thumbnail then the chances of someone clicking to view your image are greater (and yes this can successfully be accomplished without showing the nudity, I see it everyday) but if you have a Content Advisory generic icon or a 'Nudity Inside" text, I can almost guarantee that the views will decrease because there is no indication of your ability as an artist.

As for the 'banning of nudity' on the site, as I stated we have never discussed this and I dont' see that ever happening because we understand the beauty of artistic nudity.  I can't see into the distant future any more than anyone else so that is why I say what I know to be the exact truth and that its not been discussed, we have NO plans for changing allowing nudity in any way so what more to you want me to say? Its not "PR" talk, its the simple truth.  I can say on a personal opinion level if you ask me to give my personal thoughts on whether this could ever happen since I am on the admin team and know how everyone on staff feels, I would say No I don't ever see a banning of artistic nudity on this site. I can 100% say that this new thumbnail rule is definitely not a first step in banning nudity on the site, there are no underlying ulterior motives to move toward a non nude site with the implementation of this new policy. 

I'm sure no matter what I say or how I say it, someone will twist my words, pull words out of the context of the whole discussion, etc and make something there that isn't. 

Why didn't someone just explain this before? This actually makes sense. BUT when you (meaning the staff no matter who said it) just keeps regurgitating the words:

"A thumbnail is supposed to be an accurate representation of the image you've posted. We aren't going to allow "censored" words, blots or blurs." 

it just gets infuriating because you are looking for a strait answer but you keep getting a broken record. I was not even in the conversation and I could see how irritated people were getting  because of those words being tossed at them like it was supposed to shut them up and satisfy them.

Earlier in the thread I did try and explain this but just as members do, I get frustrated as well when my words continue getting pulled out, twisted, etc so it probably didn't come out as good as it could have.

And it also helps when the person asking the questions does it in a straight forward, respectful, calm way:)

Its been a rough week and I apologize if I wasn't thinking through my posts as well as I could have been.  Multi tasking gets hard sometimes, lol

Maybe instead of filtering nudity, we should filter out the prudes who have a problem with the human body.

This is REALLY getting rediculous.  When you go and censor Leonardo da Vinci, that's when you've really gone off the deep end.

Why do we get a email that "Person's Name has uploaded an image on Renderosity.com! but then we can not see it because the link to the image just take you to a page without the image and it says... This image is currently under review and cannot be viewed except by moderators and coordinators.

Do we get another email when the image can be seen? I think it would be best that we do not get a email till the image can be seen.

Quote - Why do we get a email that "Person's Name has uploaded an image on Renderosity.com! but then we can not see it because the link to the image just take you to a page without the image and it says... This image is currently under review and cannot be viewed except by moderators and coordinators.

Do we get another email when the image can be seen? I think it would be best that we do not get a email till the image can be seen.

The ebot automatically generates when the image is uploaded as it should. The problem is the image in question has been moved to the "holding" area because the member used a thumb with nudity/violence in it.  So the ebots are working as they should.

Quote - I SAID it was ONE factor not the ONLY FACTOR. That was my point Darth. I didn't say it wasn't a consideration but it WASN'T the ONLY ONE

*One of our goals is to promote artists and show the world the wonderfully creative art work that is expressed through digital mediums. Another goal is to have consistency of the rules and presentation across all areas of our site: Galleries, Free Stuff, Tutorials, Blogs, Homepages and the MarketPlace. 

**In order to reach both these goals, we need to change the way thumbnail images appear to match the rules in the MarketPlace and the weekly newsletter. Thumbnail images across Renderosity will no longer contain nudity or graphic violence going forward

*In addition, we want to feature artists from the Art Charts in the weekly newsletter. However, since we don't allow nude thumbnails in our weekly newsletter, we can't do that until after we make this change. 

*The point was it was not listed as the ONLY reason and I have stated that numerous times

And the point the ptb are missing is that it should not have been a consideration to begin with, as there are filters already installed for free for users to use should they wish not to see that sort of artwork. As I already pointed out, if someone chooses not to use those filters, and then they see shiney hiney, its their own fault. If parents don't use them, and their children see some shiney hiney, again its the parents fault. 

It is not my responsibility or that of any other member too run around making sure someone elses child does't get their little hands or eyeballs on some shiney hiney, that is their parents job. And I for one do not appreciate Renderosity telling me or the other members here, that it now is our responsibility. Whats next, Rosity going to start charging us all a fee for child support payments too?

Quote - > Quote - I SAID it was ONE factor not the ONLY FACTOR. That was my point Darth. I didn't say it wasn't a consideration but it WASN'T the ONLY ONE

*One of our goals is to promote artists and show the world the wonderfully creative art work that is expressed through digital mediums. Another goal is to have consistency of the rules and presentation across all areas of our site: Galleries, Free Stuff, Tutorials, Blogs, Homepages and the MarketPlace. 

**In order to reach both these goals, we need to change the way thumbnail images appear to match the rules in the MarketPlace and the weekly newsletter. Thumbnail images across Renderosity will no longer contain nudity or graphic violence going forward

*In addition, we want to feature artists from the Art Charts in the weekly newsletter. However, since we don't allow nude thumbnails in our weekly newsletter, we can't do that until after we make this change. 

*The point was it was not listed as the ONLY reason and I have stated that numerous times

 

And the point the ptb are missing is that it should not have been a consideration to begin with, as there are filters already installed for free for users to use should they wish not to see that sort of artwork. As I already pointed out, if someone chooses not to use those filters, and then they see shiney hiney, its their own fault. If parents don't use them, and their children see some shiney hiney, again its the parents fault. 

It is not my responsibility or that of any other member too run around making sure someone elses child does't get their little hands or eyeballs on some shiney hiney, that is their parents job. And I for one do not appreciate Renderosity telling me or the other members here, that it now is our responsibility. Whats next, Rosity going to start charging us all a fee for child support payments too?

It was a consideration because it was one of the top complaints from the Community Survey (this past year and the year before it)by members and that is what the survey is for, to see thoughts/suggestions of members taking the survey. 
And if you want to pull that consideration out of the mix for arguements sake, there were still enough important factors involved so the decision to make the changes would have been the same.

Ah well stacey whats done is done.

Oh and your not the only one who's had a bad week.

actually I have a serious point to make at this stage rather than pot stirring:
What this policy represents to me is lazy programing and lazy site management.

Let me justify why:
At renderotica, where i upload the majority of my artwork. There are genre's. Eg Male Solo, Male/Female Male/Male. etc. You decide a genre when you upload. ANd you set your prefereces when you join the site, and are encouraged to do so. As some people find that certain situations in life are "offensive".  So all those images in that category are invisible to the the memeber. Even if you have uploaded the artwork yourself and have ticked it as a genre that is not available to you (I upload artwork for other peoples pleasure...) I cannot see it myself unless I change my preferences. I do this temporaririly and then change them back.
And you are foreced to pic a genre or the site will not let you upload the pic.  And if a pic is in the wrong genre, the user can very quickly tell by the thumbnail that "hey I didn't want to see that" and reports it to managment. They re-classify (not ban unless its against the TOS) - no harm done. Sure I've ticked the wrong box a couple of times, and had images re-classified. Its no biggie really.
So to me, the site is completely hetero, even though I have uploaded some Homo-erotic artwork there myself - I cannot see it unless I actively change settings....
Now on this site there are only 3 boxes to tick (that should by default be on) as opposed to the  11 or so choices on renderotica. 
And if people choose wrong: dont threaten them, correct their mistake and put it into the right area. In 3 years of membership at Otica I can count on 1 hand that number of times an image has been in the wrong category for me and I have reported it.
Also if I tick the wrong box on purpose, well the wrong people see my image, I offend someone and I upload images for other people to enjoy or be startled by - not to offend them. (well thats not entirely true, but I dont want to offend them on sexual orientation grounds...)
So this "more professional site" guff aside: the site is here to cater for my needs(an the needs of the membership) and for me to spend my hard earned cash to continue to satisfy my needs. There are many out there: photography land, poser land, and other lands that want to see the nudity and violence and have set their preferences to do so. And a big complaint is that there are items in the marketplace that now cannot be used in the galleries.
so be inclusive in an exclusive way. There are things I dont want to see too, but I set up renderotica so that I can see only what genre's I want to...and my sensibilities remain intact.
Raj

***"And a big complaint is that there are items in the marketplace that now cannot be used in the galleries."

***No...just not in the "Thumbnails"

Tom

**

 **

•  I don't think I will ever understand. Maybe it's a cultural thing. **
  **Stacey, if you have the time, can you just explain simply the following points for me.
  **
  *One reason is, **
  "that a small proportion of the membership voted it as one of the top complaints in the Community Survey.

• OK good reason perhaps. How many people voted for that or what percentage of the membership was that? Are figures available?*

• A second reason is, "**
  One of our goals is to promote artists and show the world the wonderfully creative art work that is expressed through digital mediums.*

•  OK Why is not possible to do this with some nudity in some thumbnails? There is some wonderfully creative nude artwork out there.

Another goal is to have consistency of the rules and presentation across all areas of our site: Galleries, Free Stuff, Tutorials, Blogs, Homepages and the MarketPlace. In order to reach both these goals, we need to change the way thumbnail images appear to match the rules in the MarketPlace and the weekly newsletter. Thumbnail images across Renderosity will no longer contain nudity or graphic violence going forward** **
** **
*Now this is the one I don't get. Why do the rules for advertisements have to be the same as the rules for art? This is not the case in mainstream culture. It is against the rules in the USA I guess to use nudity in an advert in a regular newspaper but it is not against the law to show, for example, A Leonardo daVinci drawing as a promo for a gallery exhibition. Is this art site saying there is no difference between art and commercial products?

Quote - It was a consideration because it was one of the top complaints from the Community Survey (this past year and the year before it)by members and that is what the survey is for, to see thoughts/suggestions of members taking the survey. 

Top complaint, by what percentage of this site's membership?  Because it's mostly the people who want the change who are going to speak up.  The people who don't have a problem with nudity (or just nudity in thumbnail previews) probably aren't going to bother to say "Oh, by the way, I think that nudity in thumbnails should remain acceptable under the TOS."

So if something like 25% of the members of the site complain about nudity in thumbnail previews, and the rest of the site's membership is completely silent on the issue, what does it really mean?

Quote - > Quote - Why do we get a email that "Person's Name has uploaded an image on Renderosity.com! but then we can not see it because the link to the image just take you to a page without the image and it says... This image is currently under review and cannot be viewed except by moderators and coordinators.

Do we get another email when the image can be seen? I think it would be best that we do not get a email till the image can be seen.

 

The ebot automatically generates when the image is uploaded as it should. The problem is the image in question has been moved to the "holding" area because the member used a thumb with nudity/violence in it.  So the ebots are working as they should.

Thank you so very much  StaceyG.

*So if something like 25% of the members of the site complain about nudity in thumbnail previews, and the rest of the site's membership is completely silent on the issue, what does it really mean?

*It means again I'll say, the members not wanting to see all the t&a was a "factor" in the decision to change the thumbnail guidelines.  It was a consideration, meaning it was one of SEVERAL things that we looked at when discussing this issue. The continuing to "pretend" that was the ONLY thing that was involved in coming to this decision is really getting redundant.  It was a factor just like when the galleries converted and we had the image resizing issue, there was some members complaining about it (not all members but some) so we took that into consideration along with discussing all the things around that issue before making a decision to change it.    We listed it because it was discussed and taken into consideration along with the OTHER factors. But it was by no means THE reason the guidelines were changed.

Also you are all free to discuss the thread topic all you'd like as long as its within the TOS but any further questions or comments needing to addressed by admin, should to be emailed to admin@renderosity.com

**I have a question.

How often are the galleries "patrolled'?

Browsing through them just a few minutes ago, I saw so many thumbs that are still going against policy, I lost count. Someone mentioned that only about 3% of the members used the wrong type thumb. I went to page 8 of the general galleries and found at least one thumb on each page that either had flat out nudity in it, transparent clothing or words that should not be there. I went to free stuff earlier and the first thing I saw was a blurred nude image about 10 feet long. (The thumb, that is, not the figure itself.) And it can't be because they didn't know. There's a link and a warning when you upload an image and free stuff items are supposed to be approved first before putting them there. I conclude that image posters are not reading and someone (meaning whoever is in charge of approving free stuff items) let a thumb through that shouldn't have.

People....get it straight. Renderosity is a PRIVATE, FOR-PROFIT SITE and as such has the right to say how they want their site to look. Wal-Mart, Target, K-Mart, your local grocery store are privately owned, for-profit businesses. And they can decide how they want their store to look. What makes anyone think Renderosity does not have this same right? So how about just following the rules, please?

And Renderosity...how about some consistancy in this matter? Hit the galleries and give equal treatment to everyone.

Oh yeah.... I was thinking that you having the right to have your site and newsletter look the way  you want wasn't censorship, but it really is. It's the banning certain words from thumbs that bother me more than the nudity, believe it or not. Too close to book-burning for me. But that's just my opinion.**

StaceyG:

Quote - I think after listening to you that have mentioned this that if you want to use the generic Renderosity "Content Advisory" icon then we will allow that.  

Is that "Yes, you can use the default Content Advisory thumb." or what?

Yes it really bothers me that i am being singled out when so much slips by..i was out browsing and saw lots of thumbnail infractions..but the second i post an image it is removed..for reasons i still dont understand,except that you think the naked body is disgusting..it sends a bad message....To many Rules..The things that used to make this site fun and different are disapearing fast..it all started for me years ago when you took our private contests away from us and made us put them in a seperate gallery and then we had to have them by your rules..(and i was giving away marketplace gift certificates).This pretty much stopped the fun contests we were having..and then again for reasons i still dont understand...its just one little thing at a time,but when you add it up,the site has changed very much over the years and i really dont think the rules have made it better,because all my favorite artists post somewhere else now.and the ones that are left are looking for someplace to go...you may look at numbers to know how the site is doing..i look at artists..and they are mostly unhappy with all this crap or they have left..and most of them wouldnt stick their heads in this Forum if you paid them..so your not going to be able to crunch the numbers for this one..I am bummed that you think all this is needed..Why cater to the 10% that are prudes..if you have ever surfed the web for nakedness..you will see stuff that no one should look at but anyone can look..The stuff here that is being censored is Ridiculous..Just an oppinion,not a tantrum.

Please direct any questions to admin@renderosity.com 

Just one fyi, each gallery area is moderated by different team members so that is why you might be seeing some not taken care of yet but yours was. It  has nothing to do with "picking out" certain members at all. The poser gallery is the largest one so the staff is bigger in that area and they have a set schedule on going through the galleries. Other gallery areas might have one or two staff members over it and depending on their RL schedules as to what time and when they can go through their gallery parts.  Just wanted to clear up why you might be seeing some still in the different gallery areas.

Can you answer my questions from 8 comments back because still no one seems to want to answer. Thanks

Damn i posted this in the wrong thread, meant it to go here lol.

Has anyone noticed that admin seemed to have stopped participating? Methinks they are using the 'let the rabble rant until they get bored and it all blows over' tactic. Not that i blame them mind you, nothing the ,membership' say is going to change anything and nothing the admin say is going to placate those who are unhappy. We're howling in the wind now folks.

DDevant,

Please read what I have posted several times, 

Please direct any questions to admin@renderosity.com* 

I have read what you have posted several times ,however you haven't answered the simple questions.
OK let's take them one at a time:-

1

  * One reason is, **
"that a small proportion of the membership voted it as one of the top complaints in the Community Survey.* * OK good reason perhaps. How many people voted for that or what percentage of the membership was that? Are figures available?

Now you must agree you have not answered that question in any of your previous statements.If you have please say specifically where.
Thanks*

I mean please read where I have posted to send any questions that you still have to admin@renderosity.com

OK i've done that. I look forward to getting a sensible response at last.

OK, WHY is there no moderators on the gallery right now! I see at least 15 images that are violating the new policies and I don't see anyone pulling those images. I think that is TOTALLY UNFAIR. Come on Stacey, if you are on line go look at just the first 6 pages, including the prebrowse page. Some are blatant nude. No pretense of trying. So that is totally uncool. 
Right!?
Ariana

I'm amazed  thumbnails can cause such a stir...  Wow!  10 pages!

Like Miss Nancy said at the beginning of this thread:

*"try to find something more worthy of your concerns."

*I couldn't agree more...

Very funny Lucie :)

Ariana,

Sending you a site mail, your numbers are way incorrect:) I just spent the last 2 hours going through every image since the new policy went into effect (4980 images) and I found less than 10 out of almost 5000 that were missed.

Quote - Ariana,

Sending you a site mail, your numbers are way incorrect:) I just spent the last 2 hours going through every image since the new policy went into effect (4980 images) and I found less than 10 out of almost 5000 that were missed.

**I'm not sure of exact numbers, but I just went looking through the first 20 pages of the ALL/ALL gallery and saw many thumbs that were there earlier are now changed or gone. So it is being kept consistant as is humanly possible. Stacey is just one person. She does need to sleep sometime.

**

My neck, shoulders and back are killing me from being glued to this computer for the last 4 days. I need sleep, lol but work to be done!!!

Hope you are doing good Unicornst:)

Quote - My neck, shoulders and back are killing me from being glued to this computer for the last 4 days. I need sleep, lol but work to be done!!!

Try NOT to dream about thumbnails :tongue2: