It seems that the general Forum where I originally posted this, is not really viewed much. I am reposting here the exchanges so far. 1. Censorship Nudity by gilo25 on 6/20/03 06:01 [Delete] I had recently posted this image in the photography section and I duly ticked the 'contains nudity' box. Today I received the following message from the management of Renderosity: 'Dear Member, One of your gallery items has been removed by the staff at Renderosity.com for the following reason: We received complaints on this image and after a lot of deliberation it was decided that this image is unsuitable for the gallery. It has an overt sexual feeling running thru it. In general images of breast touching haven't been allowed either, so that is another reason for it's removal. As this is supposed to be a PG-13 site something like this is probably better suited towards sites like Renderotica. I'm sorry for any problems this may cause you. Thank you, Michelle A. Renderosity Moderator Please keep this in mind when submitting future images. Thank you, Renderosity.com' Now my question is: if one is disturbed by nudity, why doesn't he/she tick the filter which prevents him/her from viewing nude images? Why does he/she have to look nonetheless and then complain about something which is already dealt with by the 'contains nudity' box ticking? I can understand if the subject of the image was something really disturbing and pornographic, with extreme violence, display of genitalia, explicit sexual acts etc. In the past I had another image removed, but at that time I did not say anything as its content could indeed be rather strong for some. But in this case, nobody can say there is an explicit sexual act in this image. And if the kids are around, one more reason to tick the box to prevent the viewing of nudity. Ok, I can agree that the tolerance for sexual content may vary according to cultural upbringing etc. and that it is difficult to draw a consistent line. But then why the negative judgement of a few should prevail? Why doesn't the management of Renderosity ask the viewers to vote whether a certain image should be removed or not? But I have an even bigger problem here, i.e. consistency: the site is loaded with sexual images of all kinds. As a matter of fact, those are the most viewed. What kind of rules do you apply in picking on one particular image? I won't involve any other artist here, but just look at the rest of my work. There is some form of 'breast touching' in all the following images of mine posted here: Tribute to G Rigon, Tribute to M Payton, After the bath, Denise 3, Denise 1 (where not only the breasts are being touched, but even - God forbid - some lower parts, although through a conveniently positioned cloth); and last, but not least, Den & Nida,and Den & Nida 2, where one of the models' mouth is dangerously close to the nipple of the other. How do we deal with all this? Do we remove only 'Sultry'just because somebody got a bit too excited looking at it? Finally, in this context, I don't understand the meaning of the invitation to keep this in mind when submitting new images: what is the criterion you use for exercising your censorship? If you continue with this arbitrary acts of censorship I will have no choice but to leave this site. I have no problems with that, as there are plenty of other sites where one can post without suffering the rigors of such bigot censorship, but I would like to know first what the Renderosity community thinks. Thank you 2. Re: Censorship Nudity by gilo25 on 6/20/03 06:14 [Delete] I am trying to upload the pic here 3. Re: Censorship Nudity by gilo25 on 6/20/03 06:15 [Delete] It didnt work a while ago. 4. Re: Censorship by Egregore on 6/20/03 06:15 well for few members many of us have the fabulous violence red write under theyr thumbs... i think that in a normal society the right think is to let all (ALL) the community to vote... but this is an art site so... there will be no action of censorship but great discussion an morality or something like that... so i'm confused... i'm wondering to delete my gallery and my account for more open minded and free galleries...but i will see how this story goes... may be i'm wrong 5. Re: Censorship by Egregore on 6/20/03 06:22 i think my next 3 artworks cannot be uploaded here at rendo couse of censorship problems... i'm feeling a bit suffocated :( 6. Re: Censorship by gilo25 on 6/20/03 06:22 [Delete] One more element here for you all to judge upon: I was trying to upload the incriminated image to give everybody a chance to judge, but it was being removed as fast as light by agentsmith, whose name reminds very much of a KGB spy. Looks like this is the climate we live in, here at Renderosity. Good to know though that Agensmith laughs about it and he seems to be is very proud of himself. 7. Re: Censorship by AgentSmith on 6/20/03 06:26 Gilo, I apologize if you took my "lol" incorrectly. I never like to delete anyone's pics, and I try to keep my messages of doing such light, which may be strange, I know. Sometimes it reads wrong. Sorry about that. AgentSmith 8. Re: Censorship by Egregore on 6/20/03 06:28 gilo i totally agree with you 9. Re: Censorship by AgentSmith on 6/20/03 06:31 But, basically if your pic was not allowed in the gallery's, it can't be allowed in the forums either. No, not proud, just abiding by the TOS and my job, is all. Again, sorry if it seemed like I was taking joy in what I was doing. AgentSmith 10. Re: Censorship by Michelle A. on 6/20/03 08:14 It is not an easy thing for us moderators to delete an image. It is not something that we like to do or enjoy doing. I am very sorry for the anger you are feeling gilo25. But I cannot apologize for doing my job as moderator. You must understand that there are rules, and we try to follow them as best as we can. This often involves a lot of deliberation and discussion amongst the moderators and administration before any piece of work get removed. I am not going to get into detail with your particular case, I don't feel that it is necessary, but I will say that in regards to the comment on inconsistency, it is often a case by case deliberation when it is felt an image is borderline in regards to TOS violations. So again I am sorry for your anger but I am simply doing my job as best as I can. Michelle A. 11. Re: Censorship by layingback on 6/20/03 10:11 Attached Link: http://www.renderosity.com/messages.ez?ForumID=12356&Form.ShowMessage=1295107 This might help explain it (but not justify it). Go to Poser Forums to see the discussion preceding the complaints. At least it sure sounds like the same photos. Reader had nudity enabled for Poser images I think, and thus saw nude photography thumbnails. And reader feels that nudity in photography is in a diferent class to nudity in computer generated images. I'll never paraphase in a way that didn't include my own interpretations/bias so I'll leave you to read for yourself. The view got some limited support, but not much - except from the Moderators/Admins it would seem. Title "Is it me, or is photographic erotica offensive" or something like that. Looks as if artists need to be extra careful with the actual thumbnails they use, perhaps even more than with the pictures themselves. 12. Re: Censorship by Crescent on 6/20/03 10:56 I'm the only Mod who posted in the "Poser vs. Photography Nudes" thread and here's what I said: Poser vs. Photography - It's probably the difference between seeing a fight in a movie and seeing one in real life. I can watch car wrecks all day in movies, but the few I've seen in real life bothered me for days, even if I only saw the aftermath of the wreck. If there's a picture that seems over the line, though, please let us know. MichelleA and starshuffler are really good about patrolling the galleries but even they're not perfect. As well, we do allow a certain amount of sensuality in photographs as long as they don't break TOS. Cheers! That's hardly a condemnation of nude photos in general. IIRC, the picture in question was of a woman lying on the couch caressing her breast and playing with her nipple with a very ... suggestive ... look. It was very much in the style of pornography advertisements I've seen across the web. We have left in the galleries most of the photos that contain nudity, but we have removed a few that we felt were on the wrong side of the erotic/sensual vs. porn debate. This is NOT to condemn pictures like that, to say they're evil, etc., but to say that they're not appropriate for this site. There are other sites where pictures like that will get a warm welcome, such as Renderotica. Thanks, Crescent 13. Re: Censorship by Spike on 6/20/03 11:58 Please don't blame the mods of this site for there actions, They are upholding the rules of the site. The admin team stands behind the actions of the mods. They are doing a outstanding job! 14. Re: Censorship by Egregore on 6/20/03 18:59 "a woman lying on the couch caressing her breast and playing with her nipple with a very ... suggestive ... look" mmm i've only seen a woman with a hand posed on her breast... maybe the difference between a pornographic image and a simple nude image is in the mind of the observer.... i think i am a bit deranged or perverse but in my mind i haven't seen any caressing or playing in the gilos still! 15. Re: Censorship by jumpstartme2 on 6/20/03 19:25 Ya know, why argue about it? If the Admins and Mods say it is questionable, why continue to try and post it anyways? Why not just post it where it will be accepted...like Renderotica? Renderosity has to abide by the laws of the U.S. if they are to have a 'family friendly site'...If they think an image borders on pornography then they have the right and/or duty to remove it. They have an alternate site to post these types of images.... Just my 2 c's worth... 16. Re: Censorship by gilo25 on 6/20/03 22:17 [Delete] I agree with Egregore: the difference is in the mind of the viewer. It seems that nobody is able to address the point that I have at least another 8 images posted in which there is some 'breast touching' (I listed them above.) Can anybody tell me the difference between those and this one? On Renderotica: it used to be a good site and I used to post there (that's where I started actually), but I stopped because it has become a truly disgusting site, full of poor quality crap which mostly displays blurred genitalia or sexual acts.I don't think this image belongs there. To jumstartme2: I was not trying to re-post it in the galleries, I was trying to give an opportunity to people to view it here in the Forum to form a judgement. In any case that pic was by no means disgusting, violent, repugnant. -- The family friendliness of this site is guaranteed by ticking the box which filters all the nudes images: that's why artists who upload such images are required to tick it. If somebody doesn't tick it, views the image and then complains, this person to me is a hypocrit. 17. Re: Censorship by gilo25 on 6/20/03 22:43 [Delete] Regarding the observation of layingback, if I understand it correctly, I think the problem goes back to what egregore was saying: it's all in the mind of the viewer. If somebody doesn't like nudity, he/she shouldn't like it all the time: computer generated yes,but photos no? And then again, why just some photos? can somebody tell me the difference between 'Sultry' (the incriminated one) and Denise 1 or Tribute to G Rigon? I think it is hardly defendible that Sultry is offensive and the other one no. It can be, in the mind of one viewer, why not? but do we want to enforce censorship on such thin subjective basis? 18. Re: Censorship by AgentSmith on 6/20/03 22:46 I'll take another look, but I checked out all your pics in your gallery, and I didn't see any breast touching at all... AS 19. Re: Censorship by AgentSmith on 6/20/03 22:59 Nope, NONE of your pics have hands on any breasts. "Den & Nida", a model is positioned (way) in front of a breast. But it looks far and away more of an intentional statement than anything sexual. "Den & Nida 2" - Still, nothing touches the models breast/nipple, the other models head is resting on the middle of the chest. Nothing sexual in context either. (imo) My opinions on your Den & Nida pics are just that, opinions, other members and other Mods may see different. You're a good photographer, better than I could ever do. Many artists will post here at Renderosity, but will also post pics they can't post here at a homepage. Many do, little know, and very well known artists. AS 20. Re: Censorship by DarkElegance on 6/20/03 23:38 ~blinks~ I dont think poser nudity is much different then photo nudity due to the fact that with the photo realistic textures in some renders you cant tell which is which. some of the renders are that good. The thing that is confusing me is if we all have a nudity flag...and the nudity is to warn people that there is naked flesh..and someone STILL looks why is the artist penalized for the CHOICE of the other person? I keep hearing ..well maybe they should go to renderotica..nudity is NOT porn. some of us that do nudes dont want our things in renderotica. I am just frustrated with so many people that CHOOSE to look at a nude picture then complain about it WHEN THEY KNEW IT WAS NUDE BEFOR THEY HIT THE THUMBNAIL. if you dont like nudes dont look. even after I hit the nudity flag I still put on the title nudity so that no one can miss it. if they still look then I dont think they have a right to complain. it was a CHOICE they made. no one is forcing them to look at it. I have a site that is art and erotic writtings, and I have as a pop up that comes up upon entering that states "if you are under 18 or offended by nudity or erotica leave now. if you stay and look then do not bother the webmistress as you choose to look knowing it was erotic subject mater that could be objectionable." when people CHOOSE to look..they cant bash the artist them for their vision. it is a choice. DarkElegance 21. Re: Censorship by ganda on 6/21/03 01:16 Agentsmith, it seems that your zeal as a censor has suddenly taken a plunge. Are you saying that you looked at all my pics and you didn't see any breast touching? Are you really sure? What about Tribute to G Rigon? What about Denise 1? What about Tribute to M Payton? 22. Re: Censorship by AgentSmith on 6/21/03 01:30 Zeal? Plunge? I fully don't understand that at all. JEEZ...my stupid mistake, I'm so use to seeing a different color for gallery page numbers, instead of them all being the same color, I didn't realize at first that gilo25 had more than one page to his gallery. Which brings me to my next question...who are you? "ganda"? AgentSmith 23. Re: Censorship by ganda on 6/21/03 01:46 Legitimate question. I am the model. 24. Re: Censorship by AgentSmith on 6/21/03 01:49 This is NOT a question of people who choose to see nudity and then complain about it. It is about any picture that goes against TOS, that's all, you may want to think it is so much more and so many different things, but it really is boringly simple. AS 25. Re: Censorship by AgentSmith on 6/21/03 01:51 Denise 1 - holding up/touching a scarf. Denise 3 - holding up/touching her top. After The Bath - holding up/touching a towel. Tribute to M Payton - her hand is resting on her chest (breastbone), not breast. Tribute to G Rigon - cupping not really touching. Now, I know that is a grey area, but, I can only tell you how I would call it at this moment. I cannot speak for whomever saw you earlier pics when you had first uploaded them, and what ran through their mind. so, take it however you wish. Bottom line. Renderosity has had its TOS for quite some time, we didn't just spring it on everyone last week. you were to read it and agree to it...when you signed up 3 months ago. 27. Re: Censorship by jumpstartme2 on 6/21/03 03:49 Egads....here we go again... AS: I dont think they get it. People: its not about the nudity...you can flag, tag, check, tick it all you want, but if it isnt what the admins and mods say goes with the TOS, they can remove it. From the TOS: Posting Unacceptable Images: No Rape. No Torture. No Sexual acts. No Physical arousal. No Genital contact with ANY object, other than sitting or clothing. No depictions of young humanoid characters in erotic, seductive, provocative poses or context. Images that are character attacks, which could be interpreted as defamation of character, slander, and libelious. Additionally, any post or image can be removed at the discretion of staff if it is deemed unsuitable for this community. I haven't seen the image in question, nor do I have a urge to see it..but if it is a big enough concern to the PTB to remove it, then it is more than likely it should have been removed. Ya know, there are people out there that view nude art, but do not wish to see 'certain' types of 'art'...Im thinking that this is what got the complaints going.. {who knows}..so it might not be about 'someone who looked after knowing it was tagged with a nudity flag.' Regardless, its not my call...but if it were, Im sure I would've done the same... the admins and mods are doing their jobs. 28. Re: Censorship by gilo25 on 6/21/03 06:21 [Delete] I totally agree with you. As a matter of fact there was No Rape No Torture No Sexual acts no Physical arousal No Genital contact with ANY object, other than sitting or clothing in that image. 29. Re: Censorship by kbennett on 6/21/03 09:37 Correct Gilo25, but "Additionally, any post or image can be removed at the discretion of staff if it is deemed unsuitable for this community." And your image was so deemed by the moderator team. We each looked at it and came to a decision. The image is unsuitable for this site. Kevin. 30. Re: Censorship by illusions on 6/21/03 12:01 Taking a look a gilo25's gallery and specifically the images he points out are similar (i.e. breast touching) to the "removed" image...one can't help but wonder what activity was depicted that suggested such "an overt sexual feeling" requiring that image to be deemed "unsuitable". Much of his work, IMHO, suggests "an overt sexual feeling" which should not be considered "unsuitable" in general nor should it be mistaken for "prurient". Looking at his other images, it could appear an inconsistent standard may have been applied, although it is hard to say without seeing the actual image. It would seem to me, especially if this were a case of only one member complaint and coupled with the quality and similarity of images already in gilo25's gallery, a much more specific and detailed explanation could have and should have been given as a courtesy to gilo25. That said...perhaps it is time to establish a less vague standard than "unsuitable" and a tad less subjective then "discretion", at least to the extent that it serves as a basic guideline that the members can understand will be followed. It may also be time for the site to create an actual appeal process for such instances. A legitimate process a member can follow, that can be assured of fairness and legitimacy. 31. Re: Censorship by sirkrite on 6/21/03 16:25 First let me say, gilo25 I am a fan of your work. You have a great eye. :) I seen the picture in question. I think it was well done and tasteful. However! They do have you on a technicality, two of her fingers were touching her one breast showing by the edge of the areola. I personally don't find that picture in bad taste. It's not like she was squeezing her nipple or pulling on it. But then again rules are rules and were do you draw the line. Make exceptions for this and not for that can lead to more problems. Hope to see more of your work gilo25. 32. Re: Censorship by gilo25 on 6/22/03 04:39 [Delete] Kevin, I am afraid you are talking like a spokesman of a military junta here: 'And your image was so deemed by the moderator team. We each looked at it and came to a decision. The image is unsuitable for this site.' Sounds like when they arrested Aung Sang Sukyi for her own good... mmhhh.. And, as it is often the case for the statements of military juntas, your words are not supported by facts. The facts are the following : my photo and the TOS. Based on the TOS, my photo should not have been removed, as simple as that. In fact the TOS says No Rape. No Torture. No Sexual acts. No Physical arousal. No Genital contact with ANY object, other than sitting or clothing. And none of these appear in my photo. The TOS don't talk about areolas, nipples, fingers and things like that. It talks about sexual arousal, and nobody in good faith can say that there is sexual arousal in my photo. There may be sexual arousal in your minds, but not in my photo. It is also true that 'Additionally, any post or image can be removed at the discretion of staff if it is deemed unsuitable for this community.**' But since there is NOTHING in the pic that would justify its removal when judged against the TOS, I am afraid that, as Illusions is saying (thank you Illusions), you should have had the decency of explaining better why in your opinion the image was not suitable AND you should have let me post it here in the Forum to allow people to dicuss it. Finally, as Illusions is again mentioning, it is advisable that you come up with TOS that can be more specific and address situations with greater objectivity. Removing images at your own discretion, with no support from the written rules, let alone from the viewers is rather irritating and abusive. Of course, it is again at your discretion, but if you are really interested in the well being of the community you should come up asap with detailed rules and as far as this image is concerned you should post it in an appropriate section and let people vote whether they feel it is suitable or not for the community. If the community votes in favour of his deletion I will shut up forever. But if it says it should be posted you should let it stay. This is what we call democracy, partiulcarly in a border line situation like this, for which rules were not adequaltely written up.