I think that censorship is the highest form of flattery. With just my second Poser work, I created a picture that was banned from the Poser gallery. You can read all about it in my online diary.

I appreciate the comments that I received before the picture was pulled.

And so it's not unclear, I still think Renderosity is a great site, and I love most of the artwork that remains in the galleries.

Thanks for not flipping out about this. You are handeling this like a mature adult. And that's a refreshing thing to see. I didn't remove your image myself. But I can see why it was removed. It struck me as sexual satire concerning technology and sex. The other images you compared it to were more traditionally accepted expressions of "art" One thing to keep in mind is that what we all see as art is influenced by what others have done. And I think that's how an image of a man and a woman naked hugging (even if his hand is on her butt) is considered acceptable. I don't see how you can't tell the difference between your image. And the other ones. The difference is obvious to me. Yours is not the traditional type. That's not exactly bad. Just something that could offend people. Remember. We are using judgement here. Not some hard fast rule book. It's possible for us to make a bad call. Or even miss an inappropriate image here or there. I know it doesn't make you feel any better. But it's unfortunate that we mods have to do this kinda thing. We don't like messing with people's stuff. Removing images and messages is always the last thing any of us wants to do. ScottA

Hey, I didn't see the picture in question, and have no opinion one way or the other, but these two posts look to me like some of the more reasonable and adult to come down the pike in this kind of situation in a while. Grown up stuff. Just my $.02 cents. Larry F

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.

I just noticed a thread in the Forum News forum that the nudity flag button is not working for some reason. Perhaps the image was deleted for not having a nudity flag and the admin was not aware that there was a bug? There's always a possibility it was just an honest mistake. You may wish to contact an admin through the Forum News forum or via e-mail on this.

I e-mailed the admin who removed it, and he e-mailed the reason back. I had clicked the nudity button, and that was not the issue. I reposted relevant e-mail correspondence at my online diary, linked in the original post on this topic.

Oops...I had read the online diary page, but I forgot to read past where you linked the image. This'll teach me to post without reading everything first.