I had the last two of my images deleted.
The first i was told there was a nude thumb. Funny does not the nude flag make one that is not?
My second image was a test of just this.
And id did work.
But this was deleted allso by thebryster.
All was done correctly by me on that image.

I have only done a handful of nudes in 600 images. So its quite possible that i forgot to flag it.

I was pmmed to email none nude thumbs but there was no apperant email to send them to this was upsetting after an image i spent three days on was deleted.

My eye sight is not good and when someone sends a link white on white
                like this space it looks just like a space.
a friend came over she looked and tried the blank space it was an email addy.
see suggestions forum for picture you will see this.

I then sent 4 none nude thumbs whitch were asked fore one each sise smaller then the others. but these were ignored.

the only responce was a very very confuseing pm that said to read the top half of the tos.
or only thing i got out of it.
then got pm,ed by some one else todays picture was pulled to.

only reason i,m posting here is because i got no cohrenat to me responce.

i,m sure you will ban me now for speaking out!

So how many have had pictures pulled?
how many wrongly?
how many for no reason.

Dave, I'm sorry you're having to deal with this....it's frutstrating, especially when you think that you've complied with what they want.

It would be so nice if the mods would just put a generic thumb (that states 'NUDITY')  in place when they find a violation instead of deleting the image.  They would encounter so much less frustration of their own and cause less anger from the member.

I didn't put a tag on one of mine and it got pulled.  My character was not nude but I agree it was questionable.  I sent a corrected thumb but it took 24 hours before it was replaced.  I was told that it usually doesn't take that long. 

As for your hyperlink.  If you hold down your mouse button and sweep it across the link, it will highlight it and then you can read what it says. 

I don't understand what the second deleted image was for.  You were testing the "nude' tag?  So you put a nude tag on an image that had no nudity?  I don't think you can do that.  If you were just testing it, you should have pulled it right away.  That may be why they deleted it.

I hope they get your corrected thumb in place soon...on the first image.

Adding - you could probably post your second deleted image with a proper thumb with no problems.

no its was a hand drawn in paint stick figure nude with two full breasts my hands not steady and my eye site bad. but it should have been in terms of the tos.
here is 2nd picture pulled bewarend its a nude!

http://thefantasiesattic.net/attic/cpg/displayimage.php?pos=-1896

Here was the first
http://thefantasiesattic.net/attic/cpg/displayimage.php?pos=-1879
you will see big differance in quality between them.

Lol at your stick figure :)  Looks similar to a Picaso that sold at auction :)

I don't have a clue as to why the stick figure was pulled if it had a nudity tag.  It should have been ok , as far as I can tell.  Maybe there's something in TOS that states you can't be a smart Alec?

Don't know what to tell ya.  Just got to wait until they fix your thumb.  You did send them a thumbnail that was within size limits...right?

i sent 4 each one under the max size it is the thumb that was generated by them on the stick figure flagged nude so there is no exscuse not to be able to use it!

 OK...to solve this for those who lack reading comprehension....

Here are the Thumb Nail Rules as posted.
I will explain each sentence .

TTENTION: EFFECTIVE JANUARY 24, 2007, New Thumbnail Policy  

**No Nudity/Violence in thumbnails, please read information at the above link

This I would hope is self explanatory

If you fail to upload a thumbnail, our system will auto-generate one for you,

What this means it will generate a thumbnail sized version of your original see next statement

which is a minature of your image.

If your image contains nudity/violence, *you must NOT use this feature;

• Please note the next statement

*you must upload your own non-nude/violent thumbnail.

Clear now?**

i thought if you flagged it nude it gave that generic gray warning? with no need to u/l one?

 Please re read my post...or better still read this:

If you fail to upload a thumbnail, our system will auto-generate one for you,

What this means it will generate a thumbnail sized version of your original see next statement

which is a minature of your image.

I think what bothers me is that there is some real inconsistency in following those guidelines--inconsistency on the part of we artists in making our thumbnails and on the part of the moderators in enforcing the guidelines.  I see extremely revealing thumbnails all the time that nobody pays any attention to, then I see stuff like the last post of Dave's which had the nudity thumbnail instead of a smaller render. 

And when do we consider it nudity?  To me, nudity means naked or partly naked.    A partly naked person would be one that showed the genitals of either sex or their bare butts, or just the upper naked torso of a woman.  A woman wearing a bikini would not need a nudity designation.   If those guidelines require nudity labels on people who are bulging out of their clothing, then 90% of all renders at Rendo with human figures in them would have to be (or should be) posted with a nudity warning. 

If Dave's last render was pulled because of his protest, that is wrong.  The moderators have every right to pull any render they feel is unsuitable, but We artists have a right to protest with our artistic skills if we feel the decision is wrong or unjust or just arbitrary.  I don't think Dave's artistic protest warrants removal.
 

Jeremy Miller 

I also want to say that I think the moderators have a complex and difficult task and that it is not always easy or sometimes even possible to make a decision that will please everybody--especially, as I have pointed out above--that the guidelines even reduced to a few simple sentences will result in many different interpretations by the individual artists (and moderators!) based upon our personalities and experiences.   In the end, though, if there are complaints, a decision has to be made for the greater good.   More often than not, for the artist in question it isn't going to go their way.   The site can be closed down, if it violates any local, state, or federal law; it can be subject to fines and lawsuits.  It's the reality that Renderosity has to live with--and each of us.  There is freedom of expression here at Renderosity, but there is also license of expression.  What is the difference?  Freedom of expression ends at the other person's face; license of expression doesn't.   I think the moderators mostly do a good and reasonable job of policing the occasional license of expression and allowing us the freedom of expression in our works.  Thanks, Moderators!
 

Jeremy

Gentle folk, I don’t mean to get involved in this dilemma but we have already been down this road here in this forum and not all that long ago. I believe it is a misunderstanding as it was then concerning the thumbnails and thumbnails only and not the images themselves as long as those images have been tagged for the appropriate concern being as this is a family oriented site. Please read the sticky in this forum and pursue it from there.  

Ok, so regardless of how clear or unclear people write  TOS and all that, and regardless of the fact that the mods work hard to keep this place workin right. I think there might be a solution thats simple, effective and disambiguous. It is different from the current TOS, but i think it may be better then what we have now:

My TOS Proposal:

Rule 1: What is nudity? and what is not?

• For acceptable amounts of skin, check brysters image in the thumbnail nudity sticky. Does your creation reveal more? then it counts as nudity.

Rule 2:

• If your image, your thumbnail, or both, contains nudity; nudity flag is required.

**End of TOS proposal

**Two rules.. and we're done. Should be disambiguous enough for most people right?

Then for the implementation in the gallery I would suggest the following implementation:

Gallery implementation proposal:

Nudity Profile Setting 1:

• It is the responsibility of the user, to set in their profile settings, if they wish to be confronted with nude content, or not. Enabling or disabling the nudity filter is the users responsibility.

Nudity Profile Setting 2:

• For users under the age of 18, "no nudity" could ofcourse be flagged by default.

Gallery thumbs with nudity filter enabled:

• If the user does not wish to see nude content (as set up in the settings of their user profile) an advisory thumbnail is to be displayed on images that have the "nudity" flag. Regardless of the thumbnail supplied by the artist.

Gallery thumbs with nudity filter disabled:

• If the user does not mind to see nude content (nudity filter turned off in the settings of their user profile) the normal thumbnail is to be displayed. This would either be whatever the artist uploaded, or an auto-generated small version of the image. These thumbnails should then be allowed to contain nudity. After all, the user agreed to have no problems with nude content in their profile settings.

**End of gallery implementation proposal

**This post is not meant to challenge the rules here or the authority of the people that run this place. It is simply a proposal of the simplest, least ambiguous nudity filter implementation i could think of.

the people here have given me final warning on this two pictures. in email and complaind about this posting here to.

So u supplied non-nude thumbnails for both pictures and thers still a problem?? how odd...

very odd, doesn't sound like the normal style of our mods, I've always found them to be acommodating and helpful...

I would also say  that the thumbnail rules are pretty clear, if the pic has nudity it is the artists responsibility to create a suitable thumb or to use the generic content advisory note

 Forcing an advisory thumb would make this whole problem disappear.

Renderosity is in Nashville. This is the state code concerning public displays of nudity.

http://www.michie.com/tennessee/lpext.dll/tncode/11665/11985/11aac/11af0?fn=document-frame.htm&f=templates&2.0#

Renderosity allows you great freedoms for free. In return they ask you to obey the laws of the state. If you don't, it's their butt on the line. They can be fined and their property padlocked until such a time as the case actually makes it to court. This could mean no renderosity for anyone for 6 months to a year.

A child will see the generated thumbnail before it ever get's stopped by the content advisory on the main picture. Adults who find this image offensive can also complain. This violates the criminal code of the state.

For the first render I don't see why it can't be posted if you include the appropriate content advisory and make either a generic thumb or use a portion of the render that does not contain nudity. It's not the mod's responsibility to do it for you.

On the second stick figure image the mod may have inserted the content advisory thumb for you. I don't know because the forum software doesn't do it. The image still violates state law and the TOS however. The blue stick figure could be mistaken for a man with an erect penis, especially if the viewer is very poor sighted, perverse, or lonely. You can erase the angled line and two swirls at his crotch, redraw the line bent, or cover it all with a cartoom fig leaf. This would then meet the TOS. It really doesn't matter how bad a representation it is. Mr. Stiffy violates the rules.

any how with all the warning threating pm,s i,m done here!

Right! I would advise you all to read the fine print at the link below.
It doesn't get more simple than this. The rules and guidlines have been well established for years and we - the staff - have bent over backwards trying to explain them to you.

http://www.renderosity.com/news.php?viewStory=13472

Wawadave posted an image that had nudity in the thumbnail which I pulled. If he had bothered to read the instructions at the top on the upload post he would have known what to do to avoid getting into trouble.

I posted this thread a while ago to make it CRYSTAL CLEAR what the rules and guidelines are.

If Wawadave had bothered to tell us of his eyesight problems, we - the staff - would have found a way to make things easier for him. Instead he chose to make public private site messages, rant and insult staff, including myself, and post another image aimed at myself and accusing staff of censorship which I also pulled under the rules of defamatory posts and nude images.

See: http://www.renderosity.com/tos.php
Personal attacks. This includes but is not limited to, destructive, abusive, defamatory communications in any form, and retaliatory attacks from personal attacks.

Almost every image that comes in for scrutiny is seen by at least two and very often many more mods and coords and a concenus is reached before a decision is taken.

The rules and guidlines have been carefully developed over a very long period and is not just for the benefit of members.(See kjer_99's posts above)

@ RayRaz: With all due respect, Ray. The rules are already in place. They are periodicly examined and changed should the need arise to reflect the changing needs of the site, but right now they are as they are for a reason.

And Electro has just given that reason. (Thank you)

Bobby has twice posted the how-to's in BIG WHITE LETTERS and STILL people are not reading the words.

The problem here is simple. SOME, and I mean SOME, people just will not read what has been written, ignore what has been written, or think they know it all and don't need to read what has been written. You know who you are.

The Bryster
Forum Moderator

Thread locked.