first off, i think it's more and more clear this isn't about members or average viewers.  this is about how it appears to a casual observer of some type.  one who isn't going to actually view the images, or view a person's gallery.  if it was actually about our galleries rather than theirs, we'd have to change old thumbnails or they'd do something to separate the two.  the more i think about it, the more banner ads make sense; that's one of the main things that have changed.  it's now common for me to see banner ads for tech gear totally unassociated with creative work.  and acadia talked about how renderosity looked like a business other than it was.  to who?  it must be someone outside the community, because internally this site is known.

i'm probably wrong, and it's just a guess.  but it's a guess that makes sense to me.  i mean, in general, the t&a thumbs got more hits.  it got traffic.  just like a lot of the merchants that have been driven away in the past sold very well.  some people might say they don't  look or don't buy those items (like myself, in general, actually), but all the data  says  they're (we're?) in the minority.  ordinarily, sites want more money, not less.  so i'd be surprised if there were no monetary gain from this.  and it's so surface, and doesn't affect the actual viewing experience, that it makes no sense for it to be a ploy to "expand their market."  and many sites support their owners with banner ads.

second, what about davinci?  pardon?  that flew right over my head.

third, AnAardvark - that's exactly my point.  you don't need to have an image "chock full of nudity" for the nudity to not be incidental.  in fact, imho, the stuff i do where nudity isn't incidental is more meaningful, more like actual art,  pushes more boundaries, and is actually what i want to do.  if it's incidental, then i probably shouldn't have made the figure nude in the first place.  nudity communicates too much and isn't a common state.  just like magic or technology in a story, i think (in general) i shouldn't use it as a gimmick but as a meaningful and deliberate part of a whole artwork. 
though, interestingly, this policy has made me stop adding to my gallery.  so my one of my only three pics is my most simple and boring, a basic nude.  basically, the policy has stopped me from adding what i consider my best work.

please note that my values are quite particular to me, and that i think everyone else should create the art that's truest to them and what they want to do.   to me, as i mentioned, that was the point of posting here.  to have a basically unfettered creative outlet.  i already do work to spec.  heck, if rendo were rewarding us with just about anything other than use of their site, i'd have been for the changes. i don't care about daz restrictions because it's they're consistent and they make it into a contest.  not a gallery about the artist, but about the host company.  if rendo did the same, i wouldn't have minded.  as it is, i feel like a child who's had pins stuck in their clothes to enforce good posture in front of visitors.