stacey go to sleeeeeeeeeeeeeeeep

Very funny Lucie :)

OK i've done that. I look forward to getting a sensible response at last.

I have read what you have posted several times ,however you haven't answered the simple questions.
OK let's take them one at a time:-

1

  * One reason is, **
"that a small proportion of the membership voted it as one of the top complaints in the Community Survey.* * OK good reason perhaps. How many people voted for that or what percentage of the membership was that? Are figures available?

Now you must agree you have not answered that question in any of your previous statements.If you have please say specifically where.
Thanks*

Can you answer my questions from 8 comments back because still no one seems to want to answer. Thanks

**

 **

•  I don't think I will ever understand. Maybe it's a cultural thing. **
  **Stacey, if you have the time, can you just explain simply the following points for me.
  **
  *One reason is, **
  "that a small proportion of the membership voted it as one of the top complaints in the Community Survey.

• OK good reason perhaps. How many people voted for that or what percentage of the membership was that? Are figures available?*

• A second reason is, "**
  One of our goals is to promote artists and show the world the wonderfully creative art work that is expressed through digital mediums.*

•  OK Why is not possible to do this with some nudity in some thumbnails? There is some wonderfully creative nude artwork out there.

Another goal is to have consistency of the rules and presentation across all areas of our site: Galleries, Free Stuff, Tutorials, Blogs, Homepages and the MarketPlace. In order to reach both these goals, we need to change the way thumbnail images appear to match the rules in the MarketPlace and the weekly newsletter. Thumbnail images across Renderosity will no longer contain nudity or graphic violence going forward** **
** **
*Now this is the one I don't get. Why do the rules for advertisements have to be the same as the rules for art? This is not the case in mainstream culture. It is against the rules in the USA I guess to use nudity in an advert in a regular newspaper but it is not against the law to show, for example, A Leonardo daVinci drawing as a promo for a gallery exhibition. Is this art site saying there is no difference between art and commercial products?

Say nothing, conform, what a stupid foreigner I am.

OK I get the message

"On the front page there is an article entitled "daVinci Thursday". Does not the 2nd image of that article, the one of the full frontal drawing of a male contravene your own TOS?"
So you interpret that as bitching. Interesting. I thought I was joking but there you go. 
"Actually, the proper response from Rendo to the original post that started this thread should have been, "Don't be so bloody silly," " That is the kind of reaction I was expecting from them.
Interpretation is everything. I was amazed when they pulled it. Still they want uniformity of art and the Market Place so what can you do?
The point I was hoping to make was that some great art involves nudity and there is no reason why this should not be shown as a thumbnail. It is not unprofessional to have nudity in a thumb.da Vincis image is no way unprofessional. As proven by RR's use of the da Vinci picture. I never thought in a million years that a site that professes to be an art site would not allow a da Vinci pic.
So I guess it backfired a little but I'm still gob smacked.

*"I can see why they did it.  Removed the DaVinci, that is.  Not that I agree with it, but I can see why.
It is sort of related to the new thumnail images, true....but it's not that the "prudes" complain about such things.  Because, usually, in all honesty, it's not the "prudes" who complain when stuff like this goes down.

It's those who are pissed at the new policy, who will bitch and complain until everything is "fair".  Well, DDevant, ya got your wish!  Renderosity is "fair and balanced", and the DaVinci sketch was removed!  Bravo!!!  Way to stick it to the man!  I mean, because, if we can't have horribly-lit, zeppelin-breasted, plasticky skinned thumbnails in the galleries, we HAVE to complain about every posting Rendo makes that might come close to skimming the line, or even crossing it!!!

.....it's crap like this that reminds me why I could never be a humanist.  I don't have enough faith in people."*

I thought it was worth reposting this comment by an ex moderator of Renderosity just so everyone is clear that it is my fault that Leonardo da Vinci’s art has been banned from this site.
The problem with this site, Jen, is that we have  to many horribly-lit, zeppelin-breasted, plasticky skinned thumbnails in the galleries. This is mainly due to Poser been the most important ap here. Get rid of Poser and we have a pretty good art site. There are one or two good artists that use Poser but the majority are masturbatory fantasies and this is the problem and this is why we have the situation that exists here right now.

"It was removed due to the fact that we do not allow nudity without a non nude thumb."
There was and still is a  non nude thumb that led to a page with "Man of Vitruvio" on it,  Not sure what you are saying here apart from the pedantic difference between "banned" or "removed" from this site.
So what am I misunderstanding?

How is a pinup gallery going to work. All nude art is not pinups. Unless you are suggesting da Vincis "Man of Vitruvio", which has just been banned from this site, is a pinup. The easiest way to ban tasteless nude pictures, of course, would be to ban Poser :)

"Our apologies, we had the article ready prior to the thumbnail change and didn't catch it when it was launched. The article has been updated. Thanks for letting us know."
So you are now saying under the new Renderosity rules the art of da Vinci will be censored?
This is a joke Yes?

Attached Link: http://library.thinkquest.org/13681/data/davin2.shtml