Norbert, I have no idea what you're trying to say.

"Please give us a little time to see if we can develope reasonable boundaries concerning this kind of thing." You already have them. Whatever standard is applied to M/M images, should be applied to ALL images. that's what people are complaining about. Hey, bet you guys wish C&D was still around right about now, huh?

Maybe, Mosca, maybe not... when R'osity says "no genital contact, do they mean genital-genital, genital-body orfice, genital-(insert partner's esoteric body parts here)...? Perver-heh, I meant-Inquiring minds want to know. (On a serious note, it would also make for a sharper line, and less contention... everyone would know up-front what to expect.) And does it mean aroused genitals, or what? (let's face it, the guy in front of Tony's render was as limp as a bowl of over-cooked Top Ramen...) It's way easier to depict aroused men than aroused women visually, no? It'll be a royal bitch to make specifics, and I'm not so sure you'd want them posted on a page where minors could get at it in the first place, but it would certainly help the more allure-minded artists know where the sandbox walls are set. /P

Actually No Mosca. This IS a Poser related subject. And nobody is getting out of control (or will for that matter as long as I'm alive and moderating ;-)). I don't mind people getting a little bit OT. It's actually kind of nice. More like a community type thing. But sometimes I do feel more like a kicking post. Than a problem solver. :-( ScottA

The lack of respect for all of the hard work we do for you here is amazing. You know, Scott, Im willing to give people the benefit of the doubt... to a limit. To say, "oh, the image was deleted was because it might be interpreted that the guy was getting rear-ended" really pushes it over the mark. As a few others have stated in this thread, you guys look the other way when you have "genital contact" in your straight images, but let a couple of guys show some affection, and its "oh, look! hes getting plowed!". But of course........that makes too much sense. Yeah, and all those gallery images of Mike and Vicky are just a couple of bowling buddies having a beer. I suggest you think about your own post before coming down on other people with those kind of accusations. But hey... that might make too much sense, right?

"(let's face it, the guy in front of Tony's render was as limp as a bowl of over-cooked Top Ramen...)" Looks to me like he's the bottom Ramen... "But sometimes I do feel more like a kicking post. Than a problem solver. :-(" Sorry, Scott. I don't think anybody was pointing a finger at you. The admins ARE mighty quick on that delete button, though--and if the appearance is that the rules aren't being applied fairly, you can't blame people for squawking.

I think that if they are right and there is a sex act going on behind the scenes, the guy up front is faking his pleasure since a true responce seems to be laking. I think we need to stop trying to read the character's thoughts and stick to the real issue. Are nude, romantic poses allowed or not? Simple, basic and non-gender specific.

the guy up front is faking Guys. Never. Fake. =)

:) Hi gang - Sorry it took me so long to get to the post. I dont come into the Poser Gallery very much. Let me set the record on a few things. 1) I'm not a homophobe. I have plenty of gay friends..Male and Female. 2) I received a complaint from a member about the image. I may have made bad call here. Really - I'm human as well and can make mistakes in judgement. This does bring up a very valid point. There are plenty of M/F images very similar to this one in the galleries. Due to that fact I am leaving this one for now. I have asked for input from the rest of the administration team on this and have had one admin that felt it was on the edge but still wasnt 100% convinced it was a TOS violation. I appologize for pulling the image. I am going to leave it the image. I would like to extend my appologies to tonymouse for removing the image. I hope you accept my appology. Best Reagrds gang and happy posing! Clint Renderosity Administration PS - tonymouse that wasnt a canned message. I typed it all by myself. (grin)

Here's my favorite part: "Genital contact with ANY object, other than sitting or clothing." Is a person an object? Is it ok if there's genital contact with a sitting person, or a clothed person? Or a sitting or clothed object? Or if the person to whom the genitals belong is sitting? This is yet another example of why web-sites need actual writers to produce their copy/text.

To ScottA Like I said before I never cried foul I just wanted to know what was going on and while I appreacieat this diologe I didn't start it. I was told about it and joined in because it was my piece and feel obligated to do so has any body at your end even seen the email I sent asking about all of this in the first place??

Thanks, Clint. Just for myself -- also a gay artist -- I appreciate the letter to Tony. Having said that, however, bear in mind that when anyone says it was on the edge while allowing heterosexual images that are far more graphic, I tend to get a little... curious as to what future standards you plan for all images in your galleries. Im sure we will all be watching this development with great interest. Thanks again.

Bravo, Clint. Nice to see someone on the admin staff own up once in awhile.

I told you Tony.... Don't sweat it. Really. It's not a problem. Don't make me come over there and give you hug buddy. ;-) ScottA

Thank you clint truly that is all i wanted if the admins decide that the line is here. . . or here that is fine as long as it is fair and eqitable to all. I was not making any acusations. actually mostly I was confused cuz I though it was a tech glich. did you evEr get the email in question from me.

No, we cant have that, because that would be genital contact... =)

Doh!! I knew you gonna say that! :-)

Mosca - Thanks man. VirtualSite - Well I dont want to get into the homophobe issue here. Everyone has their feelings on the subject. One admin felt this way. That doesnt mean we all. They are intitled to their feelings just as we all are. I dont think you will see any changes. I personaly have no problems with someones sexual orientation. :) Thanks for your comments. Clint

Man - Slow this thread down..hehe...cross posting like crazy. tonymouse - Yes, I got your E-Mail to Admin. I read it and you made me think. Thanks for the kind E-Mail and not sending me a I'm so mad I'm gonna rip your head off type E-Mail. You are very professional in your tact and I appreciate that. Have a great day everyone. Clint

This does bring up a very valid point. There are plenty of M/F images very similar to this one in the galleries. Due to that fact I am leaving this one for now. I have asked for input from the rest of the administration team on this and have had one admin that felt it was on the edge but still wasnt 100% convinced it was a TOS violation. If there are many M/F pics like that here, why is this one causing such a stir, and why are you leaving this one "for now" If his goes the M/F ones go also

"They are intitled to their feelings just as we all are." Yep, and we ought to be entitled to raise hell if those feelings are expressed in a way that's clearly inappropriate, and makes a particular group of members feel excluded or discriminated against.

Well, I'm gonna chime in on this one...no big surprise, as I'm probably the most-censored artist at R'osity! I saw this image yesterday. It was of two men in a shower, and one man was embracing the other man from behind. You could plainly see the genitalia of the man in front, and it wasn't erect. I shower with my wife all the time, and even though I embrace her from behind, I don't recall ever having stuffed the salami up her exit wound. I looked at the image, and saw two men embracing. I didn't see anything sexual about the image at all. I applaud you, Clint, for thinking this through and allowing the image to be reposted.

"I shower with my wife all the time, and even though I embrace her from behind, I don't recall ever having stuffed the salami up her exit wound." Well, if you do, remember not to use the Dr. Bronner's peppermint soap as a lubricant!

This has been great, I lookforward to seeing how this affect the standards here. for Clint I never whine or bitch it gets you no where. I just wanted to talked it out and it looks like we are. Looking forward to a long and fruitfull (you can take that one anyway you want) assoc with you all.

First point, I'm not gay!!!,but if others can post a M/F image in the same pose and get away with it, I feel you have the same artistic rights of display with your gay content even though myself and other "Breeders" would not hang a six foot poster of it in our lounge rooms, no matter how artistic. Many uknown artists have become famous by exhibiting controversial subjects that attract "bad press publicity" ,among them Norman Lindsay who incurred a 50 year ongoing wrath of our Australian church groups with his "Crucifixion scene" painting composed of naked women from his art commune. To some his work is "FINE ART" ,to others it is grossly offensive poison. Most contributors at Renderosity are into their own fields such as sci-fi,glamour,martial-arts,modelling,nostalgia and a dozen other subjects that are not of interest to everyone. Tonymouse, you are as equally entitled to your lifestyle and artistry theme as we are to ours. Tommy.

Legume - Thanks for the comments bud. The image is back in the gallery. I made a mistake. tonymouse made me realize this with his VERY tactful E-mail he sent to me. The reason I changed my mind is that you are right .. there are M/F images in the gallery as well and a M/M image should be removed because its M/M. Please do understand that I made a mistake and have retracted my decision about the image being removed. Sorry I had a "Knee Jerk" reaction to it. Clint

Well spoken, Clint. Sorry for proclaiming you a homophobe.

Yes thank you Clint!!!! Looking forward to future discusions

Umm... "M/M image should be" That should have been M/M images shouldnt be removed.. But i think you all caugh my drift. Clint

Gosh, I feel a Hallmark moment coming on.... OKAY, EVERYONE, GROUP HUG! Thats it, yeah, thats it. Little closer now. Oh thats sweet. Thats so nice. Yeah, now a little closer, little closer... oh yeah, thats soooo nice... Oh yeah, oh yeah, ohhhhhhhhhhhhh yes! Yes! Yes!.... Whew. Okay. Go away now. =)

Here's a situation where those of us who complained earlier should take a moment to thank ScottA and ClintH for serious consideration and thoughtfulness in addressing the concerns.

That said, I would also like to see the guidelines re-worked, which is something ScottA mentioned. The thing that had upset me once on having a picture removed is that I had indeed read the guidelines, and thought I was following them in good faith, and then still got it removed. I'm guessing that's probably the most upsetting aspect for anyone who has had a picture removed. If the guidelines are re-worked, though, one of two things should happen: (1) the moderators should follow them consistently, or (2) the guidelines should explicitly state what discretion the moderators have, if the moderators are to have discretion.

The goal of creating a guideline that would filter out the porn is a good one.

The end result in this particular case is a good one, though, and I'm happy to see the moderators were listening.

By Jiminy,by Crikey!, wasn't I right with my comments on "bad press" and controversial content in my last reply. Dianne and I just visited "Tonymouses" gallery out of curiosity, (you understand) we both agreed his work is good despite the sexual orientation of the characters. The controversy here has inspired 375 viewings already, must be a record for that time frame. Tommy.

Well this may not be C&D but it's still funny shit! :) Artists! To damn liberal for thier own admins, whatever next?!? :) "out of curiosity, (you understand)" But of course, God forbid anyone should think you were actually interested in this sort of thing! LOL :) "when in a hole, stop digging..." :) later jb

To Scott and Clint,

1. You can't win for losing.
2. Remember, this IS a community of ARTISTS
3. You do realize that you will now have to come up with rules which are excruciatingly detailed, (kind of like the tax code) covering every possible situation which may arise in the galleries (that may not be such a bad idea for you) or you will be pilloried and labled as, and let me get my list out, "homophobic, sexist, bigoted, racist and a Nazi"....did I leave any out?

Freedom of speech and expression is a double-edged sword and different people are offended by different things. I don't know who complained about the image, but if the person that complained had posted something that offended some of the other people on this forum (take your pick of whatever you find offensive) would they have complained that they were offended or would they just let it go? If we are calling for fairness here, it should extend to EVERYONE. I understand the need for clarity in the rules, and perhaps that is what is really at issue here, but let's not pounce on the moderators and start slandering and libeling them.

I don't usually respond to things like this, but sometimes I get tired of people being bullied if their way of thinking isn't in lock-step with the current mores.

Joan

I get tired of people being bullied if their way of thinking isn't in lock-step with the current mores Now thats a riveting statement. As I sit here trying to figure out your post (you do seem to be dancing on both sides of something), are you saying that it would have been just peachy-keen okay if Tonys image was withdrawn without comment? That, in the name of something we cant quite define here, Tony should have just allowed it to be censored? Sorry, but I think you ought to clarify your position here, because if youre saying what I think youre saying, then perhaps you too should re-examine whos imposing a "more" here, current or otherwise.

Well I posted a pic with two guys a while back and was politely asked to remove it 'cause it showed an erect penis. I can accept that as a rule - no male erections, and no explicit sexual contact. I havent posted a non explicit homosexual pic yet. And I will post more pictures with those two later - bound to stir up some hooraw anyways - seeing as how its a mixed race couple as well. :) Just this time the groinal areas will be hidden. Lyrra

Actually I'm kinda surprised that the image is still there. But after reading this whole thread, reviewing the terms of service on this and looking at the picture in question for a few minutes, it gives the impression that sex is occurring. The sheer mechanics are argueable, but if a picture showed a womans head at crotch level with a mans groin, his hands in her hair, but her head was obscuring the act, it would still look like sex wouldn't it? Also IIRC their was a similar discussion not to long ago in C&D about a similar 'embrace' between an man and a woman. Many many people thought it implied sex. Last thing I remember was the image was pulled. Correct me if I'm wrong and the image was allowed to stay. What this looks like, is that in order to remove the stigma of being labeled homophobic the rules are changed. Sorry but that sucks. I respect the job you guys do as admins and I know you can't please everyone, but if you wrote your rules to prevent 'porn images' maybe you should stick to your guns.

Nope...The decision was not made due to the homophobe comment. The man in the front is not erect. If he was the image would be gone no questions asked..period. I made a mistake in removing the image. There is no genital contact that you can see. We arent waffeling on this. I made a bad decision lastnight when I pulled the image. I was busy with other site stuff...Got a complaint...Took a look...Went ah..I gotta remove that..etc.. I should have taken my time analized it better before making a snap call. I will be doing that in the future. Sorry for all the problems over this. Clint

I must be going nuts. All this fuzz about COMPUTER GENERATED images? Stupid little colored pixels neatly ordered? God forbid that a real disaster happens... Maxx

Ok, I want to clarify something - not start another war. Does this mean no erections?? That's not on the TOS and frankly while I've done one nude male (not erect) I had planned on doing more and frankly I'm a woman who (there really is no delicate way to say this - sorry) finds a hard stiff one alot more alluring then an overcooked noodle. So are the new TOS "softies" only? Does that also mean no erect nipples?

The Tos states... "Depictions of physical arousal or sexual acts." An erection on a male is "Physical Arousal".. so the answer to your questions LadySilverMage is...You are correct no erections. Renderositca will be more than happy to accept those images. Have a nice evening. Clint

Ahhh, thank you. But honestly wouldn't that cover erect nipples as well - although that could be achill from lack of clothing ;-) I've only been to renderotica once - they were closed at the time - never went back.

LadySilverMage - your funny...Yea that could be the cold on the nipples...I dont think thats as big a deal as an aroused male. Funny thing is a mans parts will react the exact oposite when cold.. (goofy grin). Talk to you soon. :) Clint

Tell me about it - showers good - just not when the hot water runs out.... I'd also like to emphatically state that as a 6' tall woman with a 6'3" husband, in regards to the shower - where there is a will there is always a way ;-)

ahh nice, a happy ending :) i saw this last night and wondered how it would go... was confused too so didn't bother chiming in. :) i reckon this just got spotlighted cos we're not used to seeing it. we're desensitised with nude vickies but not nude mikes (no matter the scene.) so the nude males tend to catch more eyes and hence tend to get scrutinised against the tos more. ("little-old-lady contingent" lol@Mosca) sooo.... more nude mikes! yeah! :D joking okay? i may like the male body lech but i don't think the gentials specifically are really that pretty. like scott said, you guys hang out. not very neat ;)

not gonna even go into it.... but nipples technically are not genitalia (play no nessesary part in reproduction) ok, continue argument....

You "analized" the picture? You better get a spell checker, Clint, that typo's a DOOZY.

did you check the nudity check box? Sometimes they erace images that are not properly checked. I have seen other images in the gallery that are still there, Did your guys have wood? Because renderosity hates to knock on wood you know if you get what I mean.

true as that may be shadowcat, I'm sure that if one posted an image of blatant sexual stimulation of the nipples I'll bet it would get yanked - technically genitalia or not :-)

Only one way to find out...