Quote - > Quote - Jen,

So does that mean that my image I used as an example in my first post in this thread

http://www.renderosity.com/mod/gallery/index.php?image_id=1991601

Will now be exempt from a nudity flag & special thumb nail, as genitals are not shown?

I hope that's true...

 

As there are no genitals shown, you may remove your flag/thumbnail if you wish.  

 

Thank you - that was a most beautifully executed U-turn!

I must admit I did not expect Rendo authorities to admit it isnt nudity, after such categorical declarations that it is. I was wrong - they are capable of listening.

Of course I'm happy my initial posting without a nudity flag was declared correct, and I will repost it without the flag and special thumbnail.

However, it doesnt fully solve the problem. It is still open to confussion and arguments(as random27's arguments point out, for example). Are you saying, Jen, that the tos will be fixed so the term 'no clothing' as defining images with nudity will be omitted? or is it a modification for moderators guidlines only? Are there other changes to the rules? when and where will all of these be announced?

Seems to me it is still left to random/arbitrary interpretation  by the moderators.

What about images with less than realistic representation of the human body? When are they 'nudity'? This is particularly pertinant for paintings. My painting 'links', I gave as example in my first post, was removed becuase I would not add a nudity flag. 

(you can see it at http://www.redbubble.com/people/artpearl/art/4799945-1-links )

According to the new 'sane' guidlines, can I now post it with no flag? the genitals of either character arnt visible. Her nipples are within sight line but arnt painted with any clarity. I think this is not more nudity than if she was painted wearing a body suit. What's the verdict here?

If you think I only care about my own images, another example, perhaps more extreme: The artist Anaber has the most beautiful drawings/paintings with figures who some might  interpret as wearing no clothes, but there are no specific brush strokes defining the genital areas or breasts. Are the figures in

http://www.renderosity.com/mod/gallery/index.php?image_id=1957685&user_id=599251&page=3&member&np

nude? there is nothing to suggest clothes, nothing to obstract the body areas from line of view, but would anyone sane claim it requires a nudity flag?

Look at her gallery (worth it in any case)-she has some similar paintings in terms of partially abstract body representation, some are flaged for nudity and some arnt. Cant blame her- the rules are not clear, it's up to individuals how they interpret what they see.

I still maintain it is extremely hard(maybe impossible) and time consuming to device and police a good scheme for nudity flagging. Which brings me back to my original suggestion.

Allow me to flag my whole gallery as 'not suitable for sensitive people'. Make viewers declare themselves as 'sensitive'. That will activate a filter which will prevent them from seing any of my images. They will be saved from seeing my subversive/deviant posts. I can still post freely. I will NOT miss them, I dont care if they dont see any of my non controversial posts.

The issue of the netnanny was brought up earlier in the thread as an analogy why not to declare non-nude images as not suitable for all viewers. I dont understand this attitude. If site owners chose to encrypt their site, and dont mind if that loses them possible audiences, what right have you to complain about it? isnt it their perogative to limit their audience, isnt it? If you think your kids are missing out, check it out yourself.(or educate your kids to make the right decisions themselves. You trust an electronic brain more than your child's?)

Similarly in this case, if the artists dont mind losing a section of the audience, why should rendo make it their business to prevent that?

So, I know you had your yearly stuff meeting recently. Was this suggestion brought up?

What was the conclusion? why do you consistently refuse to  give me any feedback on that?

Thanks for listening. I'm hoping the trend towards sanity will continue.

 

"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/