Quote - first off, i never said anything about classical art being prudish.  second, i never mentioned cherubs (though Sean did, were you addressing him?).  third, in this context, it's not about the original intent, but the modern interpretation and impression.  the point being, many enjoy art today with nude minors in ways that are not prurient, work from that perspective, and have others view their work this way.   so i'm not sure what point you're trying to make with the lecture and the assumption of ignorance.

First off, I've often seen the point made that "the current rules make classical art verboten".  I was merely pointing out that not all underage nudes in "classical art" were intended as images of innocence upon their original creation.

And I'm not sure what point you are trying to make with the lecture and the 'assumption of ignorance' -- whatever that means.

Quote - yes, there are prurient images here, but i disagree with your huge assumption that it's best to be safe and completely unambiguous to all viewers when it comes to art.   i could go into the myriad negative effects in this community and our society at large that i see, but i really don't see a point to that.  you have your opinion, and Rendo has it's policy, and nothing will change either.  might as well let it be.

As for "huge assumptions" -- I wasn't talking about "art" in general.  I was talking about this website in particular.  And, yes -- it's best to follow the mores than its best to follow.  Especially when it comes around to this topic.

I could go into myriad negative effects that I see in the world at large.  But right now I just don't have much time to play verbal marbles......there's a big project due out.  So I'll have to let it be.

But I do have some cat's eye boulders to call upon at need.

Quote - and wait, if you're saying that you weren't saying JoePublic was talking about Renderotica, why did you bring it up in response to his now vanished post?  i mean, wouldn't that make Renderotica's policies entirely irrelevant to what he was talking about? 

Odd, that.  It's to miss the point just as effectively as some others did.

The central thrust of the point wasn't whether or not someone else was or was not referring directly to Renderotica -- that's immaterial & a red herring.  The point was that the same rules which obtain here also obtain there, with some differences.  In fact, as dasquid has so helpfully pointed out to us -- Rotica's rules re:underage images are even more strict than the rules are here.  And as I've already mentioned: for some of the same (good) reasons.

Something To Do At 3:00AM