Jeni,
Thank you for your quick answer, it is taken as a sign of good will. It is a shame however that being so keen to reply quickly you focused selectively on some points I mentioned and not on others. In particular it is a shame you didnt get the overall message I tried to convey – rules that are unjustified in principle, and unenforceable in a consistent and fair manner.
Let me restate some of the central, most important issues I tried to raise, perhaps you can address those.

Rendo should review their rules with the general view to minimize restrictions on its members as much as possible. Dont make new rules or leave old ones if they arnt morally justified. Dont make or keep rules that arnt clearly and fairly(to all members) to enforce.

1.The nudity rule is unjustified in principle. It implies something is morally wrong with nudity and the general public should be protected from it.
Nudity is seen as wrong only by a fraction of the members. Their views should not infringe on the expression freedom of others. I suggested a way to enable puritans not to encounter any of my work which may include nudity. Let them declare their wish to avoid such subjects. Let me declare my work may not be suitable for them. This way they can still avoid potential images they object to and I dont have to brand my creations as immoral.
You can add the new system on top of the current one – if some just want to flag specific images for nudity they could. For those like me who see it as objectionable there will be an alternative.
2.The rule of 'no commercial advertisement' on forums is unpractical and its benefits dubious. There are many ways to circumvent it (some of which I mentioned), so I dont see the point in having it. If it is kept it should be kept across the board and applied to all  posts and all members. Product quality cant come into it. Are you saying all products which you disallowed advertising are bad products? The identity of the vendor shouldnt come into it. Are you saying some prominent members deserve different treatment then others?
And who's to judge what is good quality or if the creator is 'talented'? The vue moderator certainly has no qualifications to judge what's good for vue'rs – he doesnt use it and brags about the superiority of Bryce... As far as I know at the moment there is nothing to specify what kind of products are exempt from the rule. Are you saying books are exempt? What about tutorials (for fee)? What about software/plugins? What about scripts? Is it limited to poser objects? Morphs? Make your choice – delete the rule or apply it across the board and clarify the inclusions and exclusions in the TOS or as a stickie in each forum.
(I've seen your announcement on the Poser forum. I asked the vue moderator REPEATEDLY to have a similar one in the Vue forum. This was completely ignored.)

3. If you solicit suggestions from the public provide real reactions and follow up. Just saying 'added to a list'  without further progress is lip service with no respect to the suggester.

Please address these matters of principle explicitly if you decide to reply, and/or raise the issues in a staff meeting. Anything else will be a clear validation of my suspicion – rendo officials will do their best to shut up serious complaints/issues. This could be done softly and politely as you did, but politeness shouldnt be confused with helpfulness.

To end I'll touch on some of your comments with regard to some specific details, just to keep the record straight

1.The image I chose to demonstrate the illogical consequences of applying the nudity rule does not violate any rules. You cannot see the nipples or genitals area so you dont know if there is or isnt a piece of clothing there. I've seen many images with a tiny circle barely covering the nipples area only(I can provide examples). That is considered OK. Maybe my character is wearing those. Maybe she's wearing a similar triangle on the genital area? If I post an image with a female facing the camera but behind a low wall, you can see her shoulders and up. No clothing visible on that part. Should this image be flagged for nudity? She maybe nude but maybe she's wearing a strapless dress?
In the civilized world it isnt up to  the 'defendant' to defend his innocence, it is up to the rules-enforcer to prove a rule has been broken.
Another way to look at it – if I was to chose a thumbnail for it, consistent with 'no nudity in thumbnails', which part of the image should I avoid? All parts of the image of any size or location are free of 'disallowed bits'. If all parts could appear in the thumbnail the image is not a nude.
It is possible to implement and enforce 'no vissible nipples/genitals'. It is impossible to enforce 'no clothing', it leads to ridiculous scenarios.
2.Bringing up  my unflaged painting was just a different type of example, tradditional art rather than CG, how the rule can lead to strange scenarios. Maybe  you and the moderator now think this one should have a flag. But you havnt answered the related queries – would the guy himself be OK as his genitals arnt seen? Would a cubist representation be exempt?
Not long ago I was told that an image rendo used to promote their Halloween competition should be seen as 'violence' saying the red on his face is 'not real bload, it's only paint'. Well the brush strokes on her chest are not real nipples, they (and the rest of her) just paint...make that consistent!
3.Aliens' nudity – I'm glad some people may find their specific clash with the nudity rule is resolved. I can almost guarantee the relief will be temporary. Another border case will come up perhaps with the creature resembling a human just a tiny bit more...
It's the nudity rule as a whole that is wrong, not the various quirks.
4.It is unnecessary and uncalled for to 'hint' I will be sanctioned if I repeatedly post unflagged images which are then deemed nudity. Yet another sign of your intrinsic disrespect and heavy hand approach to decent members' comments. You can ask the vue moderator how cooperative and respectful I was when he thought my image  should be flagged.
I dont flag images if I think they dont contain nudity. I dont play cat &mouse games with the moderators. Confusing rules will have the result of people interpreting them their own way. Yes, it may add more work for the moderators. Exactly my point. Remove this rule and implement my suggestion above, it will simplify life for you too.
However, to be honest and frank, I do not intend to add any more nudity flags at all to any work in the future.
As I said I find this practice wrong and will not brand my images 'immoral' any more.
That may mean I cant post here. It's sad, but there is no lack of other sites and I'm sure more will pop up with time. Others, perhaps more prominent than me, have left and found other grazing grounds. You can chose to encourage people to leave or you can treat them and their suggestions seriously.

"I paint that which comes from the imagination or from dreams, or from an unconscious drive. I photograph the things that I do not wish to paint, the things which already have an existence."
Man Ray, modernist painter
http://artpearl.redbubble.com/