sargebear opened this issue on Jan 12, 2004 · 82 posts
sargebear posted Mon, 12 January 2004 at 9:40 PM
We did it once before and we can do it again, they our money, and THEY delete our Images and speech, and when they can't take it they LOCK the thread, so i say if your gay, JUST BOYCOTT them. and spread the word. i have printed out everything and plan to send to "certain Gay Publications" they would really like to know all about this site and how they treat us. According to there ( ROS) rules, and they don't go by TOS either.
Smitthms posted Mon, 12 January 2004 at 9:46 PM
Sarge....... Melory deleted her own posts... NOT Us. Don't believe Me ? Ask her. Thomas Poser Coordinator
Melory posted Mon, 12 January 2004 at 9:50 PM
I DID delete my posts because I wanted it to end...it got much uglier than I intended...let's move on to something else shall we? And just FYI...I'm not gay...I'm a happily married woman who has no intentions of boycotting anything.
Caly posted Mon, 12 January 2004 at 9:53 PM
Well you don't actually have to Boycott per se... You could consider something like a 'rosity diet. :D As Ronstuff suggested... give it 30 days. If stuff comes into the store that you want ask the merchants if it is available elsewhere or if you can buy the item directly. Kind of like treats. :D There's just a lot of inconsistency. Would be nice to underline it for them. If no one says anything, nothing changes. :) I would hate to have to stop shopping here forever.
Calypso Dreams... My Art- http://www.calypso-dreams.com
wolf359 posted Mon, 12 January 2004 at 10:04 PM
XENOPHONZ posted Mon, 12 January 2004 at 10:05 PM
I'll stage my own boycott later this month - when I make a HUGE purchase from the Renderosity store.
lobo75 posted Mon, 12 January 2004 at 10:53 PM
Whats the point of boycotting? No one but a small group will do it and it will have no effect and even if it did they would never admit that they are effected.
wheatpenny posted Mon, 12 January 2004 at 11:04 PM Site Admin
Before I'll boycott anyone I usually need a REAL good reason (because boycotting involves forgoing products I would otherwise want)...
Jeff
Renderosity Senior Moderator
Hablo español
Ich spreche Deutsch
Je parle français
Mi parolas Esperanton. Ĉu vi?
DarkElegance posted Mon, 12 January 2004 at 11:58 PM
well it started with a two man picture being taken down for TOS violations ...I have seen the pic it was not what they made it out as but............... the hypocracy is still going such as the wonderful pic in the gallery currently with two woman touching CLEARLY each others rumps. but I guess it is ok as it is two woman. as for boycotting. well ... I dont think they will care really. honestly I dont. I alreay wont buy here now due to the lady cherry thing. as CUSTOMERS..and MEMBERS ...we do not matter. that is a sad fact.
https://www.darkelegance.co.uk/
Scarab posted Tue, 13 January 2004 at 12:11 AM
It's only gay if two boycotts are involved.... ....or maybe two girlcotts... S.
DarkElegance posted Tue, 13 January 2004 at 12:28 AM
mondoxjake posted Tue, 13 January 2004 at 12:46 AM
Do you know that if every person, or at least the majority, in the United States refused to pay income taxes there is nothing that could be done by the government? When in this lifetime do you ever remember getting enough people of the same accord boycotting to make a difference in anything?
MachineClaw posted Tue, 13 January 2004 at 1:14 AM
just silly. their site, their rules, their bandwidth bills. They can do whatever they want. I say boycott um if ya need to or want to. however, why is this my cause to join in? I certainly don't want to see gay art in in the forums, just as I don't want to see naked vickis spread eagle like a porn mag either. hence a TOS. my boss saw the picture earlier when I was on lunch break, asked why the man in the picture had his hand on his croch and why I was looking at it. Love feeling bad when I'm reading the forums. let's just make it all go away. rendersoity gone. then what? what purpose is a boycott? sending to gay publications? what do you want or need to happen? sigh at least in the 60's they had manefestos and you could figure out what 'movement' people were fighting for. There aren't nearly enough Space Orc's in the galleries and I'm offended! it's Racism! oh please.
Mec4D posted Tue, 13 January 2004 at 1:19 AM
Sargebear, don't wonder if your post will removed too, and why? not because you are a gay, because you post something like this in a 3D software forum that have nothing to do with this forum. Write a letter to ROS Admin or the owner if you feel upset. I understand this position and for me no matter gay or not gay, I don't go to say in my posts that I am hetero artist or? this have nothing to do with the sexuality, this have to do with the way of talking about, if you think that you are something special because you are a gay then you are wrong, in my eyes you are normal as all other members here so please calm down and do normal as all other around before we all (hetero-gays-lesbian-and all other creatures) change our opinion about you!!!! Hetera ;)
_________________________________________________________
"Surrender to what it is - Let go of what was - Have faith in what will be "
DarkElegance posted Tue, 13 January 2004 at 1:31 AM
ok I am missing something what is wrong with being gay????????? as for the pic and tos sorry but there are far far faaaar worse pictures in the gallery right now then the pic in question. trust me it was tame compared to alot in the galleries currently.
https://www.darkelegance.co.uk/
DarkElegance posted Tue, 13 January 2004 at 1:37 AM
oh and IT ISNOT THE TOS THAT IS THE PROBLEM IT IS THAT THEY DO NOT ENFORCE IT ON EVERYONE OR EVERY PIC. THEY USE IT SELECTIVELY. THERE IS NO CONSISTANCY IN IT. THERE ARE PICTURES IN THE GALLERY RIGHT NOW AND HAVE BEEN AND CURRENTLY ARE THAT ARE FAR WORSE THEN THE PICTURE IN QUESTION. note please caps are for emphasis. the TOS is not the problem it is how it is being used like a weapon that is the problem
https://www.darkelegance.co.uk/
Mec4D posted Tue, 13 January 2004 at 1:56 AM
Regarding the pictures you are right, but here we talk about the theme "BOYCOTT THEM" I can't remove anything else here as only my own images or posts so who are "THEY" I guess ROS Admin and Moderators that take care about so why not write to the right people, we can talk long time about here and nothing will change before the homophobic people that do this lost own "weapon".
_________________________________________________________
"Surrender to what it is - Let go of what was - Have faith in what will be "
Phantast posted Tue, 13 January 2004 at 2:10 AM
Caps have no emphatic effect if you put near enough the whole post in caps. It's just tiring to read.
TrekkieGrrrl posted Tue, 13 January 2004 at 3:06 AM
Oh great. As if it isn't hard enough to sell anything right after christmas, now we have a boycott too? And sure Rosity will get hurt. But not more than a mosquito bite, becourse not enough people WILL actually boycott them. But for the individual merchants it CAN hurt. And it's not like WE are the ones enforcing (or not enforcing) the TOS around here. You're shooting the wrong guys here, guys.
FREEBIES! | My Gallery | My Store | My FB | Tumblr |
You just can't put the words "Poserites" and "happy" in the same sentence - didn't you know that? LaurieA
Using Poser since 2002. Currently at Version 11.1 - Win 10.
Antifreeze posted Tue, 13 January 2004 at 3:32 AM
Simple solution, Require all new gallery submissions to go through a screening process before they make it into the public, for showing, and purge the existing galleries of what currently does not meet the TOS. It's done on other sites, and it can be done here as well.
Considering the strictness of this sites TOS, I'm suppressed it already is not being done, unless they enjoy the fruit of their laziness.
Clearly asking the user to comply willingly with the TOS is not working, as the galleries themselves attest, and the scattershot application of the TOS is in part due to the fact that users of the site themselves are not applying the TOS fairly. The current system requires people to report objectionable material, hence only the ones that get reported, are the ones that get yanked.
This, in my judgment, is a very poor enforcement practice. Its like flying over a city full of convicts and randomly dropping guns, with little notes attached that say, Congratulations, you are now a sheriff, go police the rest of the population.
Admittedly, my analogy is extreme, but if one studies the current system that is being used, one will clearly see that it does not work.
pisaacs posted Tue, 13 January 2004 at 6:41 AM
Maybe there should be a special gallery for banned images so that they can been seen and evaluated by the public users too, if they so wish. And maybe there can be nominations of works currently in galleries that public users think should be in the banned gallery so that discussion/comments about these works can occur too. Get some rationality, consistancy and fairness. Ha. Whom am I kidding? Never happen.
Nevermore posted Tue, 13 January 2004 at 6:43 AM
Personally I'm getting more than a little hacked off with people going off on a tirade about this site or another site. A boycott won't make any difference. You don't like the way something is being done, speak up, if your voice falls on deaf ears then walk away. You're not paying for the priveladge of accessing this site so they owe you nothing - not a bean.
For the record I'm neither pro or anti the way somethings are being handled. The TOS and the way it's enforced is a joke. You're not allowed nudity in thumbnails - what do I see on the galleries? Nudity. Personally I don't give a monkies if there is nudity in a picture, so long as it's artistic and well thought out then fine. But this one rule for one and another for another smarts of blatant hypocrisy. I saw one "offending" image that was talked about in this forum yesterday, I thought it was nicely done, very artistic, but at the same time I could see why and how it /could/ breach the TOS. Yet there are other images that slide past without a word.
In essence I guess I'm curious about one thing. The people who are continualy complaining in the forum about how this site is run and how they don't like the way things are being done - why do you still visit the site? Vote with your feet if you're that enraged, otherwise all your "controvercial" posts are hollow, just hot air.
I'm an artist, I visit this site to learn from others, talk to other people and share my art. So far I find a more open and welcoming atmosphere from the members than other sites I frequent.
This endless moaning and no backing up of convictions has gone beyond tiresome.
TrekkieGrrrl posted Tue, 13 January 2004 at 7:41 AM
Nevermore, I believe that if you set your nudity flag you won't see thumbnails in the galleries with nudity on them either. But I must admit I've never tried setting tht flag, so... Also what is considered "nude" may vary. Then: I think a lot of the complaining around here is becourse people DO CARE for this site! They like it and they get upset if they feel it is drifting in a wrong direction. Sure they could leave but you must understand that they don't WANT to leave. They want the place to improve, not slip silently down the drain. That said, sometimes people's feelings run off with them, but that again is usually a sign of them being very involved with this site and it's wellbeing :o) I wouldn't want Rosity to go down the drain. I like this place. But that doesn't necessarily mean I agree to all that happens here :o)
FREEBIES! | My Gallery | My Store | My FB | Tumblr |
You just can't put the words "Poserites" and "happy" in the same sentence - didn't you know that? LaurieA
Using Poser since 2002. Currently at Version 11.1 - Win 10.
Caly posted Tue, 13 January 2004 at 8:15 AM
It's not just the inconsistent TOS when it comes to images. Though the issues with trigger-happy folks when it comes to locking /moving threads seems to be related to that. I also haven't forgotton Lady Cherry. There's also the hypocrisy of them selling bondage stuff, genitals, and sex poses that can't be used here. Then there's the thing about refunds and copyright infringements. I asked for a refund on the GothicAngel stuff. I get an IM telling me it will be updated. I send another IM saying I don't want it, that I want a refund, and I still haven't heard back about the refund. There's also the sensation that they play favorites. Stormi's texture Charley was exclusive here. If GA hadn't spoken up, I wouldn't have known that it was a copyright infringement. These things once properly investigated and a solution found should be be told to consumers. Now I'm wondering how many other things I've bought have infringements that were swept under the rug.
Calypso Dreams... My Art- http://www.calypso-dreams.com
Nevermore posted Tue, 13 January 2004 at 8:22 AM
erynoka1: I'm well aware of the nudity flag - I don't use it because it doesn't bother me as I said in my previous post (some of my favourite artists have posted images with nudity), I just find the uneven application of the TOS annoying. No nudity in thumbnails and there is nudity in thumbnails. And yet an image of such as that talked about yesterday is banned. Caly: I refer to the TOS as one example of what is wrong here. I agree with what you say regards the materials for sale here. The copyright infringement issues is shocking me and I'm wondering the exact same thing. Fortunately I'm only a customer not a merchant - if I were I think I'd stop selling things. As for the site itself - well I don't agree with a good many things about it either, I'm just a little tired of the asinine comments that keep cropping up here and elsewhere - people going on about how bad this site is - I'm not about to go into specifics since it may perhaps be viewed as getting personal. If people care as much as they say they do then why not start making constructive suggestions on what we as members would like to see done to improve the site. Use these forums to achieve that effect. If threads keep getting locked or moved - then my earlier comment about walking applies, and I'd be among those to leave. I've found the attitude shown by some of the mods heavy handed and unjustified. Nothing sed in the threads in question has been a personal attack, just a voicing of thoughts and perhaps an assesement of the situation that is a little too close to the bone for some.
mickmca posted Tue, 13 January 2004 at 8:29 AM
You are hurting the wrong people Ernyoka, there are many, many other sites that merchants can list with. My refusal to buy in the RMP only hurts the exclusive merchants (and myself, since there are exclusives I'd like to buy). >> If you don't like it, why do you visit? Because, despite the R'osity officials' views to the contrary, this is a community of people, and I enjoy conversing with them (while trying to tune out the blustering of the thought police), learning from them, and fighting (sometimes) with them. And as for convictiona: My presence in the forums doesn't put money is R'osity's pockets. I have not purchased in the RMP for nearly a year, in spite of a growing wishlist of products I search for at alternate sites. >> Generally Without seeing the images in question, I have no doubt from the conversation that the TOS was enforced arbitrarily. (What's new?) The TOS is a joke. R'osity has one for the same reason fascists like uniforms: it makes thuggery look neato. I've said before that people who assume the view "I own the store so I can do whatever I want" do not prosper in the long term. Doing whatever you want, such as selective enforcement of TOS, is a responsibility, not a reward. There is no better test of character (as we saw recently here) than being promoted from inmate to trustee. >> Boycotts don't hurt Shrews ate the dinosaurs' eggs. May not have wiped the mighty lizards out, but it sure didn't make survival any easier. I've been boycotting Nestle for almost fifty years. I'm sure they never noticed, but I feel good about it--a few thousand dollars they didn't get. There is not an infinite base of customers, and eventually the PTB will offend, ban, or rip off enough people that it will be time to fold tents and go. Unless they get a clue that absolute power only corrupts the corruptable, but it corrupts them absolutely.
millman posted Tue, 13 January 2004 at 9:29 AM
A few things some of you may not be thinking of. Rosity is one site that I can visit and NOT have to kill java, and the first time I visit any site, java is DEAD, DEAD, DEAD. There are a lot of HTML functons that on my machine don't do anything now, the first time I had a problem with them, I looked for something to KILL that problem. Rosity still works. I haven't gotten any spyware through Rosity, the same can't be said for some of the other sites I visit. I don't have to block a lot of flashing "You're a winner!!" banners, although, animated banners show up as a blank square for me. For all the flaws, and restrictions, it's still what I would call a fairly "clean" site, meaning not sending me off to fifty sites that I don't want to visit, or trying to have my machine log everything I look at. (The obvious result of that is more spam in the mailbox.) I can agree that the TOS is sometimes rather subjectively applied, but then, there are (Horrors!) PEOPLE making the decisions. IT's one of the bigger and more well heeled sites, but by far not the only one. The only comment is that the admin might spend a little time addressing answers to the unanswered questions, and I don't mean "Read the tos" as an answer. A hair trigger finger on the lockdown button isn't an answer, it's a copout.
mickmca posted Tue, 13 January 2004 at 9:58 AM
A hair trigger finger on the lockdown button isn't >> an answer, it's a copout. Hence my comment about inmates and trustees. Vote with your $$$, folks. It's all that matters. Think about the 30-day boycott, mention of which got the hair-trigger all twitchy. How it works: no purchases for 30-days. If you want to buy something, IM the merchant asking if it's available elsewhere. If it's not, IM to say, "No sale then," and tell them why you don't shop here. Member report cards? We have member report cards? Do we get to see them? M
elizabyte posted Tue, 13 January 2004 at 10:12 AM
"I can agree that the TOS is sometimes rather subjectively applied, but then, there are (Horrors!) PEOPLE making the decisions." See, that's the problem. People suck. :) bonni
"When a man gives his opinion, he's a man. When a woman gives her opinion, she's a bitch." - Bette Davis
PapaBlueMarlin posted Tue, 13 January 2004 at 10:44 AM
Boycotting is the wrong way to go simply because it won't hurt Admin or the Mods, but your fellow artists and brokers. If the issue is about gay art and male figures in general, then perhaps for the next 30 days people should avoid putting women in any of their art. Just flood the gallery with images of men to correct the balance.
XENOPHONZ posted Tue, 13 January 2004 at 11:28 AM
Let's see, what items can I add to my shopping cart today..... If you choose not to buy things, then it's your loss..... You ain't hurtin' nobody. 'Cept your own self.
randym77 posted Tue, 13 January 2004 at 11:31 AM
I kind of a doubt they'd notice a boycott. I have a feeling the customers who read this forum are a small fraction of the total. OTOH, the last time I got disgusted with Rosity and wandered away to other fora, they seemed to miss my dollars. I suddenly started getting all kinds of coupon and discount offers. So it might be worth trying a 30-day boycott, just to see if it happens again. ;-)
Mec4D posted Tue, 13 January 2004 at 11:38 AM
Jeremy, a Chicken was thinking about Sunday but on Saturday he lost own head. ;)
_________________________________________________________
"Surrender to what it is - Let go of what was - Have faith in what will be "
Smitthms posted Tue, 13 January 2004 at 11:50 AM
Rattler > You said : It's one persons (The mod who deleted it.) against another (The person who created it.). Not true. It was brought before the Mods, Admin, & Coordinators.... who ALL decided it was a TOS violation, not 1 person singley. As far as it being a singled out because, it was a gay image, not true. I'll post a M/F, F/F, Male solo, or Female solo image for review if I see possible TOS violations. I think its just getting publicity, because it WAS a M/M image. Just a little Clarification, Thomas Poser Coordinator
Caly posted Tue, 13 January 2004 at 12:05 PM
You're not hurting yourself XENOPHONZ. Or the merchants, Ernyoka. You can still buy the stuff either directly from the merchant or from another site. It is Renderosity that is left out of the loop. Do you really not see the issues this place has?! ================================================== It's not just the inconsistent TOS when it comes to images. Though the issues with trigger-happy folks when it comes to locking /moving threads seems to be related to that. I also haven't forgotton Lady Cherry. There's also the hypocrisy of them selling bondage stuff, genitals, and sex poses that can't be used here. Then there's the thing about refunds and copyright infringements. I asked for a refund on the GothicAngel stuff. I get an IM telling me it will be updated. I send another IM saying I don't want it, that I want a refund, and I still haven't heard back about the refund. There's also the sensation that they play favorites. Stormi's texture Charley was exclusive here. If GA hadn't spoken up, I wouldn't have known that it was a copyright infringement. These things once properly investigated and a solution found should be be told to consumers. Now I'm wondering how many other things I've bought have infringements that were swept under the rug.
Calypso Dreams... My Art- http://www.calypso-dreams.com
DarkElegance posted Tue, 13 January 2004 at 12:58 PM
as for the dallors youd be surprised how many do NOT buy here any more. and also yes many merchants will sell to you off renderosities site. the thing is - the TOS is not the problem it is the abuse and misuse of it that is- as for careing yes that is what it is. We that are upset want this site to be even... to be fair. I have written to others not just the forums. We do try and make it so that we go tot he powers that be..but in the forums it gets to the mods and admins a little better. We do try and make a difference. we are not just blowing hot air. But that is not being seen is it? I do agree with one thing...that a boycot while it would hurt rendo somewhat..it IS hurting the artists more. But as it was said the artists have other sites and/or some will work with a customer. why we dont walk away just flat out...many many many have. also like it was said...there are people here. That is why I know I have stayed this long. the people I have gotten to know.{though many are not at RENDERVISIONS or another site} Also if you notice with the copyright thing...rendo is still stalling himming and hahing..and skirting the issue..the HUGE site renderosity..but the smaller site like poser pros has already taken steps to insure its customers are happy and satisfied..worked with DAZ to make sure of it...that says something..actually that says ALOT about Rendo and how it treats its customers and what it thinks of its customers.
https://www.darkelegance.co.uk/
Dizzie posted Tue, 13 January 2004 at 1:16 PM
nightfir posted Tue, 13 January 2004 at 1:33 PM
On the boycott thing... heck with it. I think if something in the graphics section is uh well questionable have it put into a special gallery with something on this site saying that in this gallery there is adult content or whatever. I know that some people out there may have concerns about kids,etc. But that's what cyber patrol, etc is for. With all the stuff in the posts, and all perhaps it may be a good idea to have some sort of poll on the issue as to what to do. Ranting, and raving about all of this is not going to help all that much. With all that's going on this issue I think this really needs to be discussed with all the members as to what to do. Brad.
PapaBlueMarlin posted Tue, 13 January 2004 at 2:58 PM
LOL @ Cath :) I'll let you sew the chicken's head back on :) I think that even mentioning a boycott doesn't solve anything. If there is a male-specific homophobia problem here then perhaps the next Poser challenge should be to create an image of a male duo, gay or not. Perhaps there should be a lot more contests to support the usage of the male poser figures in general. Be proactive and not reactive.
DarkElegance posted Tue, 13 January 2004 at 3:06 PM
Attached Link: http://www.renderosity.com/viewed.ez?galleryid=579589&Start=73&Sectionid=1&filter_genre_id=0&WhatsN
ok I thought I posted this here but it was in the other thread but this will show the flat out double standard and hypocracy. ------------------------------------------------------ http://www.renderosity.com/viewed.ez?galleryid=579589&Start=73&Sectionid=1&filter_genre_id=0&WhatsN OK prime example..... the pic in question was pulled due to the "maybe touching " thing and the "implied sexual situation" right? ok go look in the gallery right now. there is a wonderful picture there very very very well done. with -two woman touching each others butts clearing- very sexually charged situation. but.... it is left in. ---------------------------------------------------- I asked a admin about it....guess what I was told... that the pic is not sexually charged and that it is ok not a violation of TOS...hmmm but they are touching...the butts no less....and that lil mona lisa smile...with shear underwear on.....hmmmmmm I wonder why the smile... now to the admins.... OH FOR PETES SAKES COME ON! Yes a beautiful picture but it IS against your very own TOS. but apparently not enough to get pulled..but the other pic was....God ..no not a bit of hypocracy here.https://www.darkelegance.co.uk/
PapaBlueMarlin posted Tue, 13 January 2004 at 3:21 PM
Well, there's another alternative. A lot of forums here are not being used and should be shut down. In their place could be a different forum where the MEMBERS decide what is appropriate or unappropriate to post in the gallery.
DarkElegance posted Tue, 13 January 2004 at 3:25 PM
PapaBlueMarlin...that is a great idea. P.S. I loved your picture nothing to see and uncensored.
https://www.darkelegance.co.uk/
SAMS3D posted Tue, 13 January 2004 at 5:19 PM
Is this still going on....? :-(
markk posted Tue, 13 January 2004 at 5:19 PM
Sigh! Hope noone become too rash in leaving. It seems odd, that nudity seems to be a problem and violence isn't. Just look at films etc. Lots of violence and very little sex. We are the only species on this planet that has trouble with nudity and sex. I could go on, but I wont
daverj posted Tue, 13 January 2004 at 5:23 PM
A few days before this pic was pulled there was a thumb pulled from free stuff because it showed a pair of breasts being squeezed by the same person's hands. Since that was pulled, does that mean there is a bias here against women? Don't be silly. I only saw the censored pic, but from what was described it sounded like the guy on the right had his hand in a position that looked like he was playing with himself, and because of the lighting it looked like he was sucking on the other guy's nipple. Sounds like the same TOS violation as the breast squeeze. Do you really believe that if the guy on the left had been replaced with a woman, and everything else in the poses were the same that the image would not have been pulled? If they saw a hetro image where they thought the guy was playing with himself and was sucking the girl's nipple, they would have pulled it just as fast. If you really think there is a anti-gay bias here, then instead of trying to form a boycott (which has little chance of doing anything), perhaps you should organize a movement to post lots of gay images into the gallery (avoiding sexually charged situations so they won't be pulled).
mateo_sancarlos posted Tue, 13 January 2004 at 8:18 PM
If a boycott action is accompanied by any kind of promotion of some competing site or business, then it's probably illegal, so you want to avoid that. If they did something wrong or discriminatory, then address that directly. After all, there are probably thousands of merchants here who are also opposed to anti-gay prejudice, so don't blame them.
bclaytonphoto posted Tue, 13 January 2004 at 8:46 PM
There has been a "slight" change in the wording of the TOS. no implied sexual situations now reads no implied sexual acts This should make that particular clause a little more clear to the Mods and Coords and Members.. As to the image that was removed... Yes, I voted to remove it... I'm not a Poser mod.. But the Coords brought it up, I viewed the image and voted for it's removal. Why, because the one hand appeared to me, to be touching his own genitals. There was no other reason in my mind. I exchanged IM's with the member who posted the image. It was a VERY WELL DONE IMAGE.. During our exchange, I took a third look at the image. Judging by the Pose of the hand, It wasn't her intent to show it touching. It was still a judgment call.. There wasn't any Homophobic judgment involved. To address a few more points, Bondage images are not against the TOS, just read it.. What it does say is "no extreme or explicit S&M bondage situations" So that does leave some room for posting bondage images. There will always be gray areas.. As to the image Dark Elegance mentioned.. I also don't see it as a TOS issue... I agree with the point that the TOS should be applied evenly and fairly.. One thing to keep in mind, Right now, there is no Moderator in this area. Spike is helping out. Kbennet is on an extended leave. The Coords are still learning their job. They are very new at this. If you see an image that you feel violates the TOS, why not just tell someone? Poser is an extreemly busy gallery and forum, it would take a small army to patrol it 24/7.We all have "rael" lives outside of Renderosity, I know I do. The other Mods have been trying to help out as best we can.. I just got Poser, so I don't have a clue about most of it.. Unfortunatly for me, this takes me away from my own areas. Why not cut these folks a little slack and try to help them out.. As far as market place and Copyright issues... I don't have a clue, so I won't go there... Well, I said what I needed to.. I'm might actually try to spend some time in my areas tonight. :-) Bruce "pushinfaders" Renderosity Mojoworld/Terragen Moderator
DarkElegance posted Tue, 13 January 2004 at 9:07 PM
pushinfaders some of us have volenteered to help. trust me on that. the image I used as an example is clearly a sexually charged scene. why else the shear dressing..the mona lisa smiles. the rump touching. anyone that knows me knows I have not a problem with sexual scenes or with nudity. -I- have no problem with either pic I have a problem when the obviouse is not accepted and a double standard raises. Heck a while ago {it was over the summer} I had to remove a pic because the gentials were TOO life like looking..not even TOUCHING. {btw I did it not because I got a warning letter but because of how lady nimue came and spoke to me and asked me to. she was very kind in how she did it that is why I had no problem with removing it} yet after reading and reading the TOS I could not see any violation of it. There needs to be a consistancy. an even handedness in the way things are delt with dealing with TOS. That is all most of us are asking for. Not some major upheaval of the TOS..just consistancy and even handedness. I dont think that is to much to ask.
https://www.darkelegance.co.uk/
Towal posted Tue, 13 January 2004 at 9:21 PM
From the TOS:
No Explicit sexual content [No manipulation of breasts/nipples/ no sexual situations/ no implied sexual acts/ no extreme or explicit S&M bondage situations/ no lewd or obscene sexual references]
Maybe I am just odd, but I do not hang out naked with my women friends, either resting my hand on their naked breast or they resting their hand on mine as a normal daily activity. Nor do I rest my hand on my friends naked or nearly naked rears in the course of my normal activity.
http://www.renderosity.com/viewed.ez?galleryid=566121&Start=37&Sectionid=1&filter_genre_id=4&WhatsNew=Yes
So it's ok for a woman to touch another woman's breast or for women to touch each others butts, but it's not ok for a guy to have his hands near his own genitals? It's not a sexual situation for a woman to touch another's breast or butt? I guess I am not in the norm because I would consider another woman touching my breasts as being a sexual situation.
Dark Elegance posted a picture when she says the mods say do not violate the TOS. I have posted links to 8 pics (none of which have been addressed by anyone, let alone mods...oh I take that back. Phantast asked in another thread if I wanted those pictures deleted, but doesn't mention they were actually viewed.)
After reading Dialyn's post making light of the situation and in my opinion not even addressing the same thing. As I said on another thread I think there are 2 distinct issues which either people don't understand or they do and are purposely trying to cloud one of them I am about done.
I have nearly $500 worth of stuff in my wishlist that I am < > this close to deleting along with my gallery and just not come here anymore. I'm sure no one will miss me, but at least I will feel like I'm putting my money where my mouth is so to speak and not condoning actions that I think are wrong.
Towal
bclaytonphoto posted Tue, 13 January 2004 at 9:43 PM
I read your post with the images.. I know some of them are being reviewed at this point, which ones? I can't recall at this point.. Sorry, But, I'm getting burned out. As I said, to me in the removed image that started this, it appeared to me he WAS touching it. as far as Dialyns post, she's a member just like anyone else...She's not a Mod or Coord.. I'll take a look at the image you mentioned.. Then I'll ask for other opinions. That's the best I can do. I've been on here over 2 hrs and I haven't even checked my own areas, let alone my three contests.. I'm not making excuses, just explaining myself.. I'm really trying to help you folks out.. Bruce
bclaytonphoto posted Tue, 13 January 2004 at 9:50 PM
Ok, now I have a question for you, the TOS says "No manipulation of breasts/nipples" is she manipulating the breast or nipples? IMHO, she's not Touching is a maybe... The difference between that image and the one that was removed is this, The TOS says "No Sexual acts [no depictions of sexual intercourse - between humanoids/non-humanoids/animals - no masturbation] " it doesn't have to be errect to be masturbation, so is touching the penis masturbation? Not always. Not everything is black and white...
DarkElegance posted Tue, 13 January 2004 at 10:01 PM
I do have to say one thing...Pushingfaders thank you though. you so far have been the only one to actually address the situation. and not in a "STOP IT OR YOULL GET LOCKED DELETED OR WARNED ON YOUR MEMBER RECORD" type of deal but in an actual way of discussing it. to that Thank you. it said implied sexual situations. sorry touching another womans rear end is sexual situations unless you are a doctor or the lady that does her waxing. I am a woman...trust me we do not go around in shear nighties rubing rumps with each other. {I know gentlemen the porn movies lied we are not all doing that behind closed doors} does the particular picture offend me HECK NO. it is a beautiful picture BUT you can not tell me that it is not an implied sexual situation. ~rubs her head~ there needs to be an actual clear guidline. and one that is adhered too for ALL artists and ALL pictures for the gallery. that is what we are asking for. sexual situation...ok that apparently doesnt include nudity or woman et woman touching fawning gropeing man handling or caressing each other...it DOES include a mans hand near his own pee pee. {sorry from what I have seen men seem to have their hand in the general area for other things then masterbation, the most common from my friends words is to " shift" ~cringes~ would that be implied?} it doesnt make sence. consistancy ....for every picture.
https://www.darkelegance.co.uk/
bclaytonphoto posted Tue, 13 January 2004 at 10:02 PM
I don't doubt for a second that some folks have offered to help out. I can't comment about your image that you removed or what Dee said to you.. I just wasn't there.. There are sections of the TOS that leave room for interpretation... Any "law" will be seen differently by different people, I'm sure you understand this. I totally agree that the the TOS should be dealt with consistantly. Sexual scenes in and of them selves are not against the TOS... I'll do the best I can to help you folks out... Feel free to contact me anytime.. I'm not blowing you off, but I do have some "other" things to attend to here... I'll check back on this thread in the AM Thanks for taking the time to listen to me.. Bruce
Towal posted Tue, 13 January 2004 at 10:06 PM
Bruce,
Up until you started posting I do not believe it was common knowledge that this area currently does not have a full time mod (I certainly did not know). There are 2 mods and 5 coordinators listed at the top of the page. That gives the appearance that people are "on the job" so to speak.
As I have repeatedly said I don't care either way whether the pictures stay or go. I don't find any of them personally offensive and most of them were quite well done, IMO. The point I and I think a few others are trying to make is the uneven handling of situations.
As far as Dialyn, I do not care whether she is a member or a mod or the site owner. I don't care for what I feel like is an intentional mudding of the waters. That is my right. If I leave it certainly won't be only because of her post.
There are two distinct issues as I see them.
One being the uneven handling of the TOS. That is the one that I personally have issue with.
The other being that people will complain about things they find personally offensive to them and that is what I think Dialyn is addressing, but she is doing it in such a way as to try and confuse the two issues, IMO.
I haven't seen anything here (yet) that I find personally offensive. I don't have a problem with nudity, bondage, fetish gear, same sex relationships etc. I am an adult. If I don't like something I certainly realize that I am free simply not to click on the image or thread that might contain something that does not interest me.
I am not so presumptous to assume that just because it is something I do not wish to view I should tell others that they are not free to view it if they so choose.
I expect to see a certain amount of nudity at this or any other related site. The models don't come fully clothed so it makes sense there is going to be a certain amount of nudity when people ask questions about different problems they have etc. In the galleries I certainly expect to see quite a lot of nudity. If it bothered me I would filter or simply not look at those images which might offend my sensablities.
That is a completely seperate issue than the one I and others are addressing, IMO and I wish people would stop trying to make them the same one because they are not.
I would like to thank you for stepping up and trying to help this forum when it sounds like you have a lot on your plate already. It seems that at least one coordinator has time to make snide remarks and lock threads down rather than stepping up and address the issues in the forum that he is supposed to be moderating. If, instead, he had come forward and made a statement that there was currently no mod for this forum or that matters were being looked into that would likely have gone a ways toward diffusing the situations.
Thank you again for taking time to actually address my specific post vs just trying to sweep what I have said under the rug like it was never said.
Towal
bclaytonphoto posted Tue, 13 January 2004 at 10:08 PM
Please note that that specific section of the TOS has been changed to read " no implied sexual acts" I hope that helps
DarkElegance posted Tue, 13 January 2004 at 10:09 PM
Towal posted Tue, 13 January 2004 at 10:17 PM
Again from the TOS:
No Explicit sexual content [No manipulation of breasts/nipples/ no sexual situations/ no implied sexual acts/ no extreme or explicit S&M bondage situations/ no lewd or obscene sexual references]
I can tell you that as I said before I do not hang out with my female (or male) friends naked or scantily clad with them touching my breasts or rear and consider that a normal daily activity. You can't say that it's not a sexual situation to have 2 naked people touching each others "private" parts. Thomas said straight out that touching anothers "parts" was likely to get us right back here, yet when I posted several images showing exactly that instead of addressing what he said (when I even specifically asked) he locked the thread for being Off Topic.
You said "Sexual scenes in and of them selves are not against the TOS..." Ok great! Reading the TOS that honestly doesn't seem to be the case. Can you please give an example of a sexual scene that would be allowed aside from a picture in which the 2 or more models just happen to be naked? I know nudity is allowed, but that is different than a sexual scene, at least IMO.
I want to thank you again for responding to this thread in a rational manner and actually trying to resolve it and let us know that our opinions are actually being considered vs just swept away.
Towal
pdxjims posted Tue, 13 January 2004 at 10:20 PM
...to keep my mouth shut. Didn't work, obviously. First, I don't think there's much of a problem with singling out gay images or links. Maybe a small one, but more from hair trigger firing than anything else. If someone brings any picture to the mods, it'll be reviewed for TOS violation. Second, the problem is with the uneven, shoot from the hip aspect that seems to have started. I had a message deleted because I mentioned that a freebie was going to be at a specific site, that is age restricted. I gave the site by name, but not a link to the site. The mod first made a mistake and moved the thread from the Poser forum to the Product Showcase. When I pointed out that it was a freebie, and had said so in the post, the mere mention of the age restricted site got the thread deleted. Why the mod didn't catch the supposed TOS violation in her review of the original post (she missed freestuff, too, remember) is beyond me. I then pulled my other freestuff, all of which had a readme that mentioned the restricted site. Now, when I posted a thread that I was taking a hiatus from active posting and had pulled my freestuff, there was some speculation by members as to why. I got a number of emails asking. The mods stepped in and tried to justify their decision. That made matters worse. The thread mentioned not only the site that I had my original post, it mentioned other adult sites. That thread was eventually locked by the mod who had made the initial mistake/decision. It's still there though. Other threads have mentioned the same sites, but they're all still there. Why was mine deleted and no one elses? Because of a shoot from the hip, react quick, think later attitude. Most of the mods are new, and don't have the experience (or sometimes the common sense), a more seasoned mod would. What's the solution? Well, the 'sity is a business. If they PO a lot of their membership, sales will go down, freestuff will move to other sites, and they'll make less money. Not from any boycott, but because people get fed up with the inconsistancy. Some of the best vendors have left to greener pastures, the best mod is now at a competitor, and I don't spend nearly as much money here as I used to. If the 'sity wants to stay in business, they should get their act together. They are an age restriced site themselves, catering to people who are creative, and tend to be more openminded. It's time for the 'sity to grow up. The people who spend money are adults, and want to be treated like adults. I'll shut up again. I'll try to be quiet in the future.
bclaytonphoto posted Tue, 13 January 2004 at 10:22 PM
The coords are learning.. just as I did when I became a mod...I'm still learning.. As far as how the TOS is applied, try to work with me on this... Most TOS images fall into two category's as far as I see them.. The ones that are BLATANT TOS issues, sometimes by intent, sometimes by ignorance. Then there is the gray areas.. Here's a good example the TOS says "no extreme or explicit S&M bondage situations" what do you consider extreme? What do I consider extreme? It doesn't say bondage isn't allowed... This is where there is a gray area... I understand your point... They are NOT the same issue OK, now I'm really going to check my conterst and call it a night... :-) I'll check back tomorrow.. Bruce "pushinfaders"
Towal posted Tue, 13 January 2004 at 10:43 PM
Bruce,
Thank you again for hanging in there ;) I can't answer your question on what I might consider an extreme bondage pose because I haven't seen any here. I don't find bondage in and of itself disturbing as long as it's 2 (or more) consenting people. I suspect that a bondage scene might not have as much in the "grey" area as some of this other stuff simply because of the nature of the topic.
2 people being naked and near each other would give most people the illusion that something sexual is going to happen, just happened or might happen. Again, I don't care, but I think a little more direction on what is or is not ok would go a long way toward resolving this type of arguement.
If we look at it realistically people doing NVIATWAS are most likely doing it for the sexual aspect vs some great adoration of the human body. I do nudes/scantily clad women/provocative posed models etc, but I don't post them here because I want my non nude stuff to get a few viewings ;) Mostly I do them because I have fun dressing the models up...interactive Barbie of sorts. A learn a lot from doing that type of render that I can then apply to what I consider more "serious" work.
I'm not saying people who do nudes are not artists or are a lesser grade of artist. I have seen some beautiful nudes in the galleries (one of my favorite images is a nude waves at April). I am speaking for me personally that I don't consider my doing them serious. I do them for fun and to play around. That may change in the future after I have had the program for longer and am more experienced.
I am more than happy to simply skip images or threads that do not interest me. I do not want to only have images that I find appealing in the galleries..how boring that would be. That is a different issue than what I am trying to address with the TOS thing.
See you tomorrow (hopefully no one locks this in the meantime)
Towal
sandoppe posted Tue, 13 January 2004 at 10:59 PM
Did he??? That must have been a bit humiliating! :) He must have been wearing his "too tight boxers" or something!! Geez!! Fortunately I telecommute.....and more fortunate still....I'm the boss!! :)
sargebear posted Wed, 14 January 2004 at 12:29 AM
better print this out too, before they lock it down too.
MachineClaw posted Wed, 14 January 2004 at 12:48 AM
UGH my life for an edit button! my boss is a woman not a man. I am a hetero male. Made me unconfortable viewing a picture with a man holding his crotch and have someone over my shoulder make comments to me. It's not what I come here for, and didn't expect that in the forum so I was caught off guard.
bclaytonphoto posted Wed, 14 January 2004 at 8:00 AM
Feel free to print this...This thread isn't about to be locked down.. We are have a calm and rational discussion Sarge. Bruce "pushifaders" Renderosity Moderator
Caly posted Wed, 14 January 2004 at 9:15 AM
You've been a breath of fresh air, pushinfaders. So nice to have a discussion without threats of lockdowns and warnings thrown about. :) It would actually be very hard to offend me when it comes to images in the gallery etc. I don't mind nudity or sexuality or bondage etc, so I don't have issues with the actual images. If I did, that's what the nudity tag is for. It's just what appears to be an uneven application of the TOS and a few trigger happy official folks here that cause me issues. ;) I won't bug you about the copyright stuff, I know that's really not your call.
Calypso Dreams... My Art- http://www.calypso-dreams.com
bclaytonphoto posted Wed, 14 January 2004 at 10:23 AM
Ha Ha Caly, I was afraid you were gonna ask me about your copyright issues... I don't have a clue about that stuff, nor the market place... :-) When I get some time later, I'll try to address some the issues we are discussing here.. There is no need for this thread to be locked. Well, as long as we stay away from personal attacks and B.S. like that.. Bruce
DarkElegance posted Wed, 14 January 2004 at 11:02 AM
Can we steal you Bruce and keep you here in the poser forum???????? please???? pretty please???
https://www.darkelegance.co.uk/
sandoppe posted Wed, 14 January 2004 at 11:04 AM
Yay Bruce! :)
Smitthms posted Wed, 14 January 2004 at 11:23 AM
Hi Guys... & Ladies, just for the record, I had no intention of locking this thread either, unless it resulted in personal attacks. Bruce, thanks for your time & efforts. Thomas Poser Coordinator
bclaytonphoto posted Wed, 14 January 2004 at 1:14 PM
Attached Link: http://www.renderosity.com/viewed.ez?galleryid=566121&Start=37&Sectionid=1&filter_genre_id=4&WhatsN
We were discussing applying the TOS. The image I've linked to is a good example.. (no offense to the author).. Would you consider this a TOS issue? I think it could be taken either way... pretend your a Mod or a Coord for a minute. Read the TOS, and try to apply it to this image. One could say it fell into this category "No manipulation of breasts/nipples/ no sexual situations" Is it really manipulation? is the nipple actually being touched? or would you prefer the "no sexual situations" ? That's a pretty broad area. Bear with me a minute on this one, Unless you make a TOS that doesn't allow ANY Nudity, or anything even remotely sexual...You will have gray areas.. If the TOS were more explict in it's descriptions,more black and white lets say, Then you will always have someone trying to see how far they can push it. One example is the " no implied sexual acts" It used to read no sexual acts, period. Some then some started posting images where it was obvious, that it was a sexual act,but they his the penetration with shadows or a piece of cloth or something.. Thus the implied clause.. On things being applied fairly.. I said it previously, yes, by all means.It should be done fairly. Images will however, fall thru the cracks.. unless there was a small army of Coords and mods here 24/7, it's going to happen.. There will always be images that some feel should be removed, while others don't. I'll be curious to hear different opinions on the link I provided. Bruce
DarkElegance posted Wed, 14 January 2004 at 4:14 PM
God I need an edit button. One, thank you Bruce for once more handling this so well. now, the picture in question actually is one of my favorites. very well made and very well lit. but this is the problem. it is not the TOS that is the problem it is the fact it is not being consistantly handled. if you let in one pic with touching...why not the others? touching a breast is touching. sexual or not. so why is it ok to touch a breast but not a pee pee. the pee pee in question was not erect..and actually the peepee was not being touched. it looked like is MIGHT OF COULD OF BEEN touching. but wasnt touching. but it was pulled due to that. to me that is not a gray area. touching is touching. Do I want all nudes gone? do I want erotic sexual pictures stoped...NO WAY!!!!!!! I cut my teeth on olivia and the old candyfloss comics in penthouse...I adore that type of work. I adore -doing- erotic art. I adore doing nudes. BUT there needs to be consistancy in applying the TOS. If touching a breast is ok then it should of been ok to allow malories picture in as it was NOT touching any genitals. that is why we are upset. I mean you say it is gray but it is not. I used the situation of my pic being asked to be removed{again a thanks to Dee as she handled it with respect and kindness I think I would do near anything she requested as she does it with respect} it was geting flack not for touching...not for sexual situation but because the privates looked TOO real. That to me is not a gray area. why was it geting flack? I mean seriously it didnt violate the TOS at all. if a viewer is having problems. as long as the pic is not flat out intercouse or such. then hold the viewer to some responsablity as well. most of us that do erotic or nudes not only hit the nudity flag but warn of the nudity in the title. if we are going to allow breast touching then what is wrong with male erotic art? the pic in question....there was no gential contact. It was a beautiful picture. breasts are ok but penis arent? no I can not accept that. if there IS a gray area...then why not work out a TOS that is not gray. make it clear. make it fair and make it consistant. If you ban nudes or sexual heated pics..or erotic work you wont have much of a gallery at all. so with that in mind. instaed of making it with an iron fist...make it so the artists can post pics with in reason. no not intercouse not sexual acts that are clear as day. nudity is not wrong. sexual tense situations are not wrong. erotic is not wrong. specially as you are talking about adults here. you can not use the excuse of underagers for they can go to the market place and see far far faaar worse. Make it so that the artists have abit more breathing room.
https://www.darkelegance.co.uk/
bclaytonphoto posted Wed, 14 January 2004 at 5:37 PM
"so why is it ok to touch a breast but not a pee pee" breasts are ok but penis arent? One simple word Genitalia. The TOS says "No Genital contact with ANY object, other than sitting or clothing. " There is nothing wrong with male etoric art.. I'm kinda at a loss for words right now. I don't see a difference between touching a male breast or a female breast. I'm all for the TOS being applied fairly and evenly.. I understand the issues,but, I just don't have an answer..
DarkElegance posted Wed, 14 January 2004 at 6:36 PM
thank you again trust me it is greatly appreciated that you have taken the time to answer all this...sorry
https://www.darkelegance.co.uk/
bclaytonphoto posted Wed, 14 January 2004 at 7:41 PM
Sorry, I'm just kinda burned out...
Towal posted Wed, 14 January 2004 at 7:48 PM
I give up. Thank you Bruce for wading into the fray :)
Towal
starmkr posted Wed, 14 January 2004 at 9:11 PM
I don't know why I have wasted my time on this thread. So here is my thoughts on the whole thing. Renderosity is taking the same policy as the Movie Industry. You don't see a guy playing with his dick on camera unless the film gets NC-17. Women touching other womens breast in movies get R Rating. Part of the reason there are federal laws.
randym77 posted Wed, 14 January 2004 at 10:05 PM
"Renderosity is taking the same policy as the Movie Industry." You know, you could be on to something. Though federal law has nothing to do with it. The movie industry polices itself. And filmmakers are always complaining that they have no idea why one film gets an NC-17 while another gets an R. It's all subjective, and often, they aren't even given any hints about how to fix it. They just have to keep re-editing and submitting their movies until they get the rating they want. However, it might be helpful if we knew what MPAA "rating" Renderosity was supposed to have. Even PG movies have "sexual acts," so is this site supposed to be G-rated? That's the kiss of death for even a Disney movie these days, so I suspect not. Is it supposed to be R-rated? That's not what I call a family-friendly site. But IMO, that makes more sense for an artistic site, not to mention one selling S&M gear in the MP. But in that case, I would expect, to use DarkElegance's phrase, "more breathing room" for the artists. Honestly, I don't think Melory's image would be more than R-rated. As an example, "Oz," the HBO prison drama, featured far more explicit scenes (yes, including male nudity and m/m sex), and it got a TM-MA rating, which I think is the equivalent of an R. But it certainly was not porn. And it's not against "federal law."
randym77 posted Wed, 14 January 2004 at 10:07 PM
Arrghh. That's supposed to be "TV-MA" rating.
DarkMatter_ posted Thu, 15 January 2004 at 12:17 PM
SargeBear you rule, Keep up the good work.
DarkMatter_ posted Thu, 15 January 2004 at 12:23 PM
But one think you need to know SargeBear, Renderosity may want to limit the male sex organ to make the site appear straight friendly. Im sure there are a alot of complaints fromt he straight members moaning a complaining about the gay images including some women who are disturbed by it as well, I noticed some women have a problem weith it as well. I say screw them, there always the pengin bar or the gay poser site, why stay where were not wanted we can always take are stores someplace else and they lose the gay dollar.
DarkMatter_ posted Thu, 15 January 2004 at 12:25 PM
I also noticed the script here sucks, it likes to put letters in typed sentences where they don't belong because the script buffer can't keep up with 60 words a minute.
sandoppe posted Thu, 15 January 2004 at 12:48 PM
Just as a point of information, I'm a woman....I'm not offended by gay art or gay people....male or female. I don't know the best way to deal with this. All I know is that if their's a tag that says "nudity" or "sexually explicit", I can read and will stay away if I don't want to see it. Some sites have a special spot for art that is sexually explicit and you have to log on to see it....fill out a form....etc. Maybe that's a way to deal with it. I do know this.....some of the most creative people in the world are gay as well as some of the smartest :) For me it's a non-issue....but that's just me :) I just wish we could stop getting hung up on silly stuff like this.....too many real problems in the world to concern ourselves with.