Renee Cox's "Yo Mama's Last Supper" is non-traditional photography, and Dick Detzner's "Last Pancake Breakfast" is certainly a satire. Andy Warhol's most memorable work was non-traditional at the time he created it, and now he is considered the founder of the pop art movement. Rap was not called non-traditional music when it emerged in the 70s- critics said it wasn't even music. Come to think of it, van Gogh and Renoir never touched a computer. Computer-generated art is non-traditional.

I by no means compare myself to any of the afore-named artists. But I certainly hope that it would not be the policy of this site to remove that which is non-traditional. Breaking tradition leads to evolution.

However, I can grant, for the sake of argument, that my work was non-traditional, and the other work to which I compared it was traditional. The upload guidelines do not use the word "traditional" at all.

My work did not violate the guidelines literally. It might violate a broad interpretation of those guidelines. But interpreted broadly, the guidelines would exclude a lot of works that remain. And even literally, it would exclude some of the works that remain.

My point was that my work was judged by different rules than others' work. I think the reason that my work was judged differently is because it made an uncomfortable statement, and I think that's a shame.

The owners of this site have no particular duty to host anyone's artwork. They could be completely arbitrary if they so chose. But if they are going to write guidelines, I think fairness dictates that the guidelines be applied uniformly. If those guidelines produce bad results, then the guidelines should be re-written.

While it's perhaps only interesting to me, I think quite a few of the works I sited would fail the legal definition of obscenity in Miller v. California, while mine would pass. (Though it doesn't make me feel any safer from my government, actually.)

If the artwork must be traditional, then the guidelines should so state. And good luck defining traditional. I bet that's harder than defining obscenity.

I wouldn't have attempted the upload if I thought it violated the rules. And I'm not putting it on Renderotica, if/when that site returns. My picture wouldn't fit the theme- it's not erotic. It's the opposite of erotic.

In any event, the issue deserves discussion, not argument. It's not like the Taliban destroying the Bayiman Valley Buddhas. And I'm surprised at the implication that flame wars happen here- most of what I have read gives me the impression that the people who post here are serious-minded. I've only been reading a couple of weeks, though. However, civil discussion leads to understanding and/or truth, and I'm interested in both.