Hey all - sorry I haven't been around commenting on your stuff for a few days. I was recently banned from 'Rosity because some viewer complained that there was PT nudity in my two-year-old gallery. I was unaware that we were required to go back through our hundreds of old posts every time the TOS changed, so I was penalized. Just wanted to give anyone else who didn't realize this a heads up. AND.....I dunno know about any of the rest of you, but I would dearly welcome some clear-cut and and consistently applied TOS rules instead of the arbitrary mess we have now. I don't really like having my freedom of expression constricted because the powers-that-be are afraid some wacko will get turned on by an imaginary kid running around without a shirt on. But at least I could ABIDE by the rules, no matter how ludicrous they were, if they were clearly stated and uniformly applied to ALL.

???? You were banned BEFORE being told that? That sure doesn't seem like a fair way to do things. 8-( I'm not saying this to add to the already-high volume level in this forum lately but ... I know there have been changes lately in the Poser forum mod staff ... but Renderosity SHOULD really contact members FIRST and explain what is going on and why there is a potential of being "banned." And to give people a couple of weeks to act upon it (because they could be away on vacation, or sick, or something else). Having someone complain and then immediately banning another member as a result of it seems a very unfair response.

Message edited on: 03/11/2005 12:06

checks calendar... Is it october already???

---

---

Software: Daz Studio 4.15,  Photoshop CC, Zbrush 2022, Blender 3.3, Silo 2.3, Filter Forge 4. Marvelous Designer 7

Hardware: self built Intel Core i7 8086K, 64GB RAM,  RTX 3090 .

"If you spend too much time arguing about software, you're spending too little time creating art!" ~ SomeSmartAss

"A critic is a legless man who teaches running." ~ Channing Pollock

My Gallery  My Other Gallery 

I'm not sure exactly what PT nudity is, but that's still pretty lame anyway. I'd definately expect some advance warning or a request to remove/modify an image before being banned myself. Seems the fair thing to do.

John

I'm just thinking ... In this case, it seems Renderosity assumed that Heart'Song was aware of the need to clean out galleries of nude PT content. But I can easily see why she was not. Notices on the home page are frequently missed. For example, it is VERY rare that I look at the stuff on the home page because I usually come in here to see what's happening in the forums. I immediately go to the Forums page. And even then, I only visit the forums I am interested in because I don't have them all displayed. If a notice is put in the community forum, I might not go in there. And with all of the forums here there is just NOT enough time to go through all of them. SO ... there has to be a better way to notify members that they have to clean out their galleries, or that there is a change in the TOS. To assume that we all know what is going on is not a good idea. So if someone complains about someone else, and if it has the potential to result in a banning, PLEASE give the "offender" the benefit of the doubt. Write them an email, and allow them time to respond and react. Most of us DO have a life outside of Renderosity.

Thanks for the support, Deecey. I think the Admin felt that because I had other postings removed in the past (not for violation, just because somebody found the pics sexually stimulating) that was all the warning I would ever get about ANYthing. The problem with all of this (issues of freedom of speech aside, I mean) is that when the Admin leaves it up to viewers to decide what's objectionable or not and doesn't follow a clear-cut set of guidelines there is no sure way for anyone to adhere to the TOS.

I hate fairies!!! I gonna complain & get 700 Poser users banned!!! OK, now that I got that outta my system....What a load of crap! As Deecey said "Notices on the home page are frequently missed". Hell, I don' even go there, I got my links directally to where I hang out. But it seems to me that once upon a long time ago when I signed up here they asked fer my email addy. Sure, there was a checkbox I selected statin' I don' want the newsletter, but IMO sumpin' like changes to TOS that apply to everybody should be sent to EVERYBODY, not just the ppl that read (or even occasionaly glance at) the home page or newsletter.

WARNING!

This user has been known to swear. A LOT!

It all boils down to people are just friggin scared that some overly sensitive judge out there will take offense to their images and shut the whole place down. The site's just trying to protect it's self with the new TOSes. Although I'm wondering if there couldn't of been a better why then banning the artist, umm i donna know like maybe a Renderosity sysadmin just deleting the offending file and then bringing the issue up with the artist.

Yes, I agree, thixen. And another thing that bothered me about it was that the Admin who was supposed to notify me of the ban sent her email under her own email addy instead of "admin@renderosity.com" so of course her mail got sent to the spam-holding pen and I had no clue why I suddenly couldn't get into the gallery!

Attached Link: http://www.deviantArt.com

This site is not a fair place anymore, Heart'Song. Personnally I got banned too, had multiple pics erased abusively, even one showing a simple white square... There are some other sites that are still open minded such as deviantArt (see provided link) or RDNA. Now, about your case, Heart'Song, my feeling is that if someone gets offened by a nude PT, then he/she should see a psychiatrist quicly. That reminds me the old times, when some corrupted priest were sexually attracted by certain women and burnt them for sorcery. We live the same situation here: someone completely insane is ruling the others. And what does it give? An insane system. It is quite a shame to be taxed or suspected of chil porn each time we use a PT in a scene. Maybe some of the moderators should open their eyes a little bit and see what's around them. In the 70's Led Zepelin used a pic, for one of their great LPs, showing group of nude children (it was a beautiful piece of art by the way). As far as I know it is still produced and distributed with the same cover. There is a very thin line betwin morality and puritanism. USA are definitely a puritan country. "In God we trust?" Let me laugh! How many crimes had been commited in His name? My only advice is "GET OUT OF THIS PLACE, IT STINKS!!!"

Oh, another remark: when my several pics comments were erased, and whhen I got my 3 days of bannishment penalty (that were 4 and half in reality) I did not get any message oe email before the admins took their decision but after they did it. I saw some others that had the chance to be contacted before and were able to do to the necesseray adjustments. I have never been given this chance. As you said the tos are not applied equally and the mods are not behaving equally neither according to they want to get banned...

I've no way of knowing if anyone is telling a complete and full story here, but I'd agree that a consistent admin procedure would be a good thing. And the unfortunate reality is that sometimes direct action has to be taken. There's bits and pieces in these accounts which certainly shouldn't happen. For instance, that problem with the address the admin email came from. I have spam filtering too. I use whitelist filters for some email source domains (I'm not going to give names, but they include a couple of major US ISP-operations). And I assume that an official Renderosity email with come from renderosity.com, just as eBay emails only come from eBay. Because anything else would mean that some abusive idiot could send out emails to a lot of artists.

Attached Link: http://rendervisions.com/

Hi Heart'Song I got hit by the current anti-fairy gestapo too. Totally innocent images, some which have been posted here for OVER 5 years. I did notice that it is a 'small' handfull of mods who are doing it all who have taken it upon themselfs to sanitize the site. All it takes is one or two of the 'holy-er then thou' bunch to bitch to them (knowen allies) to get an artist on the wrong end of the delete button. I will NOT ever put up with delayed selective enforcement. As of last week I had my entire gallery removed from here. No more products will I sell here. No more freebees will I post here. No more images will I display here. As of now- all my freebees, any new products, and all images are at the last and ONLY open artist site on the net. The ONLY site that stands up FOR THE ARTIST. rendervisions.com geo

Heart'Song, I have enjoyed your artwork for a long time. I better look at the tos again, I thought it was just seductive and showing genital that broke tos. Not some cute little creature running through the forest.

Love is Grandchildren.

Hi HeartSong, When the TOS change was put in to place regarding child nudity (some time ago) we requested that members make sure their galleries were within the new rules of the TOS. With so many images posted each day, we can't review every image that is uploaded. When we start receiving complaints and then see a violation we act upon it at that time. I am sure you can understand that Renderosity must follow laws, rules and regulations such as US, State law, paypal regulations,etc as well as our own TOS. I belive I explained all this to you over the phone. As far as the email regarding your 3 day ban, I am not aware of anything being sent out by a personal email address from a mod and you made no mention of that to me. We do notify all members each time they get images removed, warnings, bans, etc. When a spam filter catches it, there is not a whole lot we can do about that when it comes to a ban as the IM function wouldn't work in that case but we will email and IM upon just a removal of an image. The decisions about violations are brought to the WHOLE team before any action is taken, so they we can be consistent and fair. Thank you for understanding. Stacey Community Manager

I've seen far worse offensive images in the art gallery and they still remain. How come I can view violent content images? How come I can view sexed up females? I can view half naked females with their nipples showing threw their shirts in the galleries and no one is griping about that. It's called double standards and it's killing the artworld. All it takes it one complaint an a piece of artwork is removed and said member banned? I'm holding off putting up a gallery here then.

Stacey ... the team might think that the implementation is consistent and fair, but certainly does not appear that way from the outside looking in.

I don't think I have ever seen any image of Heart'Song's that I would consider objectionable. I have seen far riskier images done by some of the "favored merchants" that generate a lot of business for this site.

When we start receiving complaints and then see a violation we act upon it at that time. I am sure you can understand that Renderosity must follow laws, rules and regulations such as US, State law, paypal regulations,etc as well as our own TOS.

And what happens if someone was not aware that they committed a violation, for the reasons I stated above? If a person is not aware that they were committing a violation and suddenly find that they are locked out for three days, don't you think that would come as a bit of a shock?

It wasn't fair to Heart'Song. Especially when I look through her four-year-old gallery and see nothing that is of bad taste. I can see if it was a gallery full of images that pushed the boundaries, but that is definitely not the case here. The saddest part about this is when situations like this occur, it is rare to see Renderosity admit that they could have made a mistake, and could possibly owe someone an apology.

Message edited on: 03/11/2005 21:36

If you see images that violate the TOS, then please bring it to a mods attention. We will be glad to look in to it. And what we are talking about in this instance is child nudity not adult nudity. And we don't ban for one violation, we would remove the image if it broke our TOS and contact the member to warn them about adherring to the TOS, not ban them on the first offense. Thank you, Stacey

Warnings are sent to the members to prevent banning. The ban is an event that occurs when the member continuously and counciously begins breaking the TOS. This thread os going ok so far. I hope it stays in line. <---signature---> Free your Maya Opaque3D http://www.digital-opaque.net

nemirc
Renderosity Magazine Staff Writer
https://renderositymagazine.com/users/nemirc
https://about.me/aris3d/

(sigh)

I'm in my fifties. I don't appreciate being treated like a child, thank you.

I am fully aware of the TOS and thus far haven't said anything in this thread that violates it. All I am saying is that it appears, by looking through her gallery, that her art is not offensive and that perhaps a mistake was made.

Message edited on: 03/11/2005 22:35

I think the Admin felt that because I had other postings removed in the past (not for violation, just because somebody found the pics sexually stimulating) that was all the warning I would ever get about ANYthing. If the previous pictures were not TOS violations, then you should have gotten a warning before an outright banning. It seems they skipped over a few steps here and got "ban happy". Consistant, evenly applied TOS discipline would be highly appreciated, I'm sure, but that's rarely the case here at R'sity. bonni

"When a man gives his opinion, he's a man. When a woman gives her opinion, she's a bitch." - Bette Davis

I don't have anything in my gallery, so I don't know how notifying artists work. But from what I understand is that news is posted on the site only. Renderosity sends out emails notifying members of items on sale etc. Why not send out news emails indicating rule changes etc. The person can either opt in or out of receiving these emails, and if they opt out and miss out on a significant change like this one being discussed, then they have no one to blame but themselves. It seems that the way news flows on this site is inconsistent from what I've been hearing people say, and not everyone goes to the main page all of the time. I know I don't. I have my book mark set to the forums, and if I want to go anywhere from here, I click the links at the top. Also, a way to avoid inappropriate images would be to have a moderated upload for images. Meaning that any images that are uploaded to the galleries is not posted until it's passed by the moderators/admins of this site, who will either release it or vito it. While that might not be an ideal answer, it would eliminate the "nudity" that some are offended by, and give the mods/admins control over what is posted in the galleries, thereby avoiding having to ban people for misunderstandings or not having been up-to-date on the rule changes.

"It is good to see ourselves as others see us. Try as we may, we are never
able to know ourselves fully as we are, especially the evil side of us.
This we can do only if we are not angry with our critics but will take in good
heart whatever they might have to say." - Ghandi

I think that would not solve the problem, specially if the rants about not accepted images begin to appear. Why wouldn't we get complains about that if members even complain about something so simple as not getting comments on their images! As for the email news, I'll check that out with the powers that be. I don't know if they are sent out or not. <---signature---> Free your Maya Opaque3D http://www.digital-opaque.net

nemirc
Renderosity Magazine Staff Writer
https://renderositymagazine.com/users/nemirc
https://about.me/aris3d/

We already go through the galleries, as much as we can, to monitor images and make sure that they fit within the TOS. If we find something questionable, we, as a team, make sure that there is 100% something objectionable before actioning it. Having all images "moderated" before they are uploaded would be a collossal waste of time and resources. When a member violates some aspect of our TOS, they are sent an email or IM. As was stated before, we don't ban on the first offense. When (and if) the TOS is changed, it is posted on the site, and sometimes, a link is given on the message boards. However, we can't please everyone. Can you imagine the flak we'd get if we did email every member when the TOS changed? Even a little? The message boards would be absolutely FLOODED with "Stop spamming me, Renderosity!!" messages. sigh can't please everyone all the time. It's a simple fact. Jeni

Sitemail | Freestuff | Craftythings | Youtube|

Knowledge is knowing a tomato is a fruit. Wisdom is not putting it into a fruit salad.

When a member violates some aspect of our TOS, they are sent an email or IM. As was stated before, we don't ban on the first offense. Except that it appears that Heart'Song didn't get an email or an IM, just an outright ban. bonni

"When a man gives his opinion, he's a man. When a woman gives her opinion, she's a bitch." - Bette Davis

It appears that way because that's the way Heart'Song presented it. She did receive warning. All of the images in question were pored over by the whole team, not just one mod/coord. All decisions that have to do with removal are a team decision, not a decision made by one member. Jeni

Sitemail | Freestuff | Craftythings | Youtube|

Knowledge is knowing a tomato is a fruit. Wisdom is not putting it into a fruit salad.

And what we are talking about in this instance is child nudity not adult nudity. I hope you're not saying that adult nudity is ok here? You can't say that child nudity isn't ok then turn around and say adult nudity is ok because it's an adult?

Quote from the TOS: "Members/Users will not use this community for; Any practices that affect the normal operations of the community (Admins will take whatever steps are necessary to restore service). Transmitting any libelous, defamatory, or any other material that could give rise to any civil or criminal liability under the law. Personal attacks. This includes but is not limited to, destructive, abusive, defamatory communications in any form, and retaliatory attacks from personal attacks. If you need assistance, please communicate with someone from our Renderosity Team. Destructive commentary/communications made with the intent to disrupt or attack (Trolling). This applies to any communications within this community, whether in the forums, art galleries, graffiti wall, chat, or IM. Advertising or linking to any publications and/or web sites that are age restricted due to content, and/or pornographic in nature. Posting Unacceptable Images or Writing Themes: No Rape [actual or implied] No Torture [defined as: the infliction of intense pain (as from burning, crushing, wounding, crucifixion) to punish, coerce, or afford sadistic pleasure] No Sexual acts [no depictions of sexual intercourse - between humanoids/non-humanoids/animals - no masturbation] No Physical arousal [This includes but is not exclusive to: no images of an erect penis/ no images showing the inner portion of the vulva or vaginal area] 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] No Genital contact with ANY object, other than sitting or clothing. No depictions of young humanoid characters/children giving the appearance of being under the age of 18 where genitals are displayed and/or in erotic, seductive, provocative poses or context. Since age is difficult to identify with 3D images, this will be at the discretion of the Renderosity team. No character attacks, which could be interpreted as defamation of character, slander, and libelous. A signed model release with Photo-ID must be provided upon request if posting images with photographic nudes." Yes, Birddie, "Adult" nudity is allowed. In your user profile, there are options for you to check so you do not have to view nudity or violence in the galleries.

Sitemail | Freestuff | Craftythings | Youtube|

Knowledge is knowing a tomato is a fruit. Wisdom is not putting it into a fruit salad.

As a former mod, I'll confirm that decisions are team decisions. It isn't just one or two people who go out witch-hunting... but a committee of staff members who are ALL invited to review a questionable image. There is some discussion, but the final decision is one agreed upon by the entire staff. This is a good thing. Individual attitudes and biases get subsumed to a communal standard. There are procedures for removal of images where the member is notified exactly why the image was removed, the section of the TOS is quoted and linked, and the member is cautioned to refrain from continuing in the behavior causing the image to be removed. Members have complained about the form letter, but it does cover everything. If a member continues to flaunt the TOS and post objectionable images, there is a system of warnings leading eventually to a banning and then a permaban. There are some members whose images were (or are?) a matter of weekly discussion because they seemed to take delight in walking the edge of the rules. There are others who got caught, were embarrassed, might not even have thought about the effect of what they were portraying, and who decided to stay within the rules for this site when posting here. The rules CLEARLY say no exposed genitalia on humans or humanoids which appear to be under age 18. This rule is how old? 2 years? It has been a long time since tehre has been a change in the TOS and the changes were well-publicized and heatedly argued over. This includes fairies, satyrs, statues, babies in washtubs and boys at the watering hole. We might not as individuals agree with the rule, but that is the rule. It doesn't matter if the image is beautifully postworked, or if it is of a scene from the Sistine Chapel or The Library of Congress, or if it would have been ok 5 years ago... if the genitalia show they must be covered. That is the rule. No genitalia on underage figures. Considering the growing conservative morality of this country, the state where Renderosity is headquartered, the restrictions placed by PayPal, Visa, and the banks, and a host of other concerns, our desires for artistic freedom have little place in the balance. Currently. 10 years from now the pendulum might swing back. Once someone has had several images removed, as Heart'Song admits above, it is most certainly their responsibility to abide by the rules. How many warnings does it take? And if someone truly wants artistic freedom to post whatever they can imagine, they can build their own website or go to another. Last I heard, though, even Renderotica refuses child nudity. Carolly

She did receive warning. So she's a liar? And for the record, I'm NOT arguing that people shouldn't have to abide by the TOS. I'm saying that if, indeed, she didn't receive a warning before the banning, procedure is not being followed. bonni

"When a man gives his opinion, he's a man. When a woman gives her opinion, she's a bitch." - Bette Davis

hauksdottir: "There are procedures for removal of images where the member is notified exactly why the image was removed" False! I sent many emails to admins and mods to know for what exact reasons my pics were banned (I mean a true argumentation): all I got was "you break the tos" nothing more. If you call this an explanation, let me laugh! "And if someone truly wants artistic freedom to post whatever they can imagine, they can build their own website or go to another." You are completely right. Ro is certainly not a place where freedom has a meaning so far. One last word about the tos rules: during their trial at Nuremberg, most of the nazis used to say (to defend themselves) that they were just following orders and rules... The problem here is that this rule is not a good one being dicted by a not so moral puritan principle. The site should be renamed for sure: what about PURITOSITY? It sounds pretty good, no? "even Renderotica refuses child nudity" So what? Where's the big deal? Is Renderotica a reference in any kind in freedom of expression? Never heard about that. Do you mean that even pornographic sites wouldn't host Heart'Song pics? Well, you could not have been more insulting her. geoegress: Thank you for the link. I'll upload my stuff there too. :)

This makes me so sad. Heart'Song is an excellent artist. Her works are so creative and IMO, sensitive. I hope she doesn't leave this community as so many others have done in the last year or so. What a loss to everyone when creativity is stiffled. :-(

My idea of rebooting is kicking somebody in the butt twice!

Hey, Rockets! If the rules states that you get banned each time you offend those puritans, it is surely a good thing for the open minded people to go somewhere else, don't you think so?

Maybe so, but that would only let the puritans win. I'd much rather stick it out and wait for the pendelum to swing the other way. Btw, just saw your private gallery showing at RDNA. What a great honor...congratulations!

My idea of rebooting is kicking somebody in the butt twice!

Thanks a lot, Rockets! What makes me particularly grin is that one of these images used in the spotlight is the one that got me banned from here... This is a good proof that the decision taken here are much discussable even if they're taken in team. A whole team of narrow minded ones is still narrow minded. You say that leaving this place is letting those puritan wins. I don't agree. Each time someone leaves them, they fail. Drop by drop, member by member, they're loosing something more. I don't call that a glorious victory.

"What makes me particularly grin is that one of these images used in the spotlight is the one that got me banned from here..." OMG, you're kidding me! There was NOTHING in any of those images to deserve such treatment! I'd say an injustice was certainly done! I suppose I'm not looking for a victory, just serenity and a place to put my huge gallery. I'm sure the minute any of my images are removed or that I get banned, I won't hesitate in leaving.

My idea of rebooting is kicking somebody in the butt twice!

Oliver, I don't know where you say you weren't advised what you did wrong I have copies of all my correspondance to you conserning why your images were removed. We always send a IM along with the automatic email that is sent when a image has been decided on to be removed. In those IM's we clearly state why the image is removed and what section of the TOS it broke. Now if someone doesn't understand the TOS which to me is very clear then they contact us and we will explain it to you as I did with your questions. I was very spacific what you did wrong. As stated above we don't just pull images on a whim they are discussed by all members of the Mod and coord team before a decision is made so we get all views. SndCastie Community Admn

Sandy
An imagination can create wonderful things

SndCastie's Little Haven

"There was NOTHING in any of those images to deserve such treatment"
Yes, that's the opinion of many people. But not the opinion of our "beloved" team here:
"Hi Olivier,
After further consultation with my colleagues and reviewing your posting record, I am issuing you with a 3-day site ban. As previously stated, I will also be asking admin to review your permanent membership."
Appreciate the familiar salutation. That illustrates their respect for me pretty well.
Some claimed that excuses should be make to Heart'Song. Don't even think of that. Giving apologies is not the politic applied here.
To quote again someone: "And if someone truly wants artistic freedom to post whatever they can imagine, they can build their own website or go to another."
How sadly true.

Sndcastie, you must be joking, I guess! Saying "you break the tos, there is an erection here" without giving any argument to proof such words is not an explanation. You should learn how to justify your decisions without hiding yourself behind the admins. I have stored all your messages too. I'm ready to make them public and fully commented and you?

I wish to add that this image has been posted in 5 other sites using the exact same kind of TOS. At this time, I got no complain about it. On the contrary, many people congratulated me for it. Does that make any sense for you, Sndcastie?

"This is a ploy by you to fight the so called censorship of your work. I myself and karen have explained to you that if you have a problem with me or her to please contact Spike at spike@renderostiy.com or any other adminsistrator here and not to do it in public. If you continue these tactic's we will be forced to permantly ban you from this site." Those were your words. I don't call that a fair dialogue or explanation.

Quote from elizabyte: "She did receive warning. So she's a liar? And for the record, I'm NOT arguing that people shouldn't have to abide by the TOS. I'm saying that if, indeed, she didn't receive a warning before the banning, procedure is not being followed." I'm not going to call anyone a liar. What I'm stating is that the whole facts weren't being presented. We were made aware of images that may or may not have followed the TOS. Many images were reviewed. Some of them violated the TOS, some of them did not. I don't know Heart'Song from anyone here, really, and I am definitely not going to throw around "liar". I'm just here to present one side of the view. People seem to think that Mods and Coordinators here are ban happy evil mongrels. We don't just go through random galleries thinking "Gee, what can I ban so-and-so for??" If any of our members are uncomfortable with certain images, we, as a team, review them. Sometimes, the member is right. Sometimes, the member is, themself, on a witchhunt, waiting to get someone in trouble. Most often, it's someone who violated the TOS, and wants to make sure everyone else goes down with them. Oliver, First of all, I find your analogy insulting. If you feel we are akin to Nazis, why are you even a member of this site? That is a low blow that was wholly unnecessary and absolutely sickening. When we reply "You broke the TOS", that should suffice. The TOS are there for many reasons, to protect Renderosity AND its' members. In our TOS, as I have posted above, it clearly states that images including genital arousal are not allowed, and erections are included in that. The entire team is comprised of adults, and are well aware of the visual differences between an erect and flaccid penis. As SndCastie stated, if you have a problem with the way mods, admins and/or coordinators are working, contact Spike. He's a nice guy and very fair. MorriganShadow Poser Coordinator

Sitemail | Freestuff | Craftythings | Youtube|

Knowledge is knowing a tomato is a fruit. Wisdom is not putting it into a fruit salad.

People seem to think that Mods and Coordinators here are ban happy evil mongrels. Given some of the stuff that I've seen people banned for, uhm... MOST mods probably aren't, but some certainly seem to be. I've known Heart'Song for a while, and I'll wait until she clarifies, but she said she didn't receive a warning, that she had never received one. I can't see why she'd make that up, to be honest. She's not exactly known for being a troublemaker. bonni (who probably is known for being a troublemaker ;-)

"When a man gives his opinion, he's a man. When a woman gives her opinion, she's a bitch." - Bette Davis

Contacting the admin is completely useless as long as the ban decisions are taken with his agreement. Talking to him, just like talking to the mods here is like trying to discuss with a wall. You say there was an erection? I say there was not. You're 10 to think there was one? I can bring you 10 more people that will say the contrary. As I told, there are 5 other sites that shows this pic without any problem. Where does that lead us? That lead us to the fact that even if the tos are clear, the interpretation of these rules and their application to specific pics is a subjective process. Taking these decisions in team is better than individually for sure but that does not prevent you from mistake, specially if the whole team share the same kind of approch on those things. You did not like my analogy? I did not like the decisions taken against me neither. I could have used other comparisons inspired from History: inquisition in the middle age, talibans in Afghanistan, the Crystal Night in the nazi germany, the jewish affairs in France under the Vichy regime, the trials of Salem and so on. Each time censorship has been applied this kind of way, the system was turning into a parangon of intolerance which is one of the first signs of a growing tyrany system. So, I do maintain my analogy. It is well aaplied in this case. Why do I keep on in here? I want to give my support to the people who suffer from those abuse. What is certain is that I will never post any pic here anymore. I will never buy anything here anymore. Ban me for life if you think that solve the problem. You say I'm sickening? What is sick here is the tos themselves! Is a nude child image a perverted vision in itself? Who is insane: the one that makes such pic or the one that feels excited by it or even the one that imagine someone could be excited? The last one is like the second with a subtile diference: he projects his own perversion onto imaginary people. Both are sick. Cerainly not the author who can't be taken for responsible of the insanity of others.

I can assure you that we don't just ban anyone for a first offense of a TOS violation. We give several warnings asking them to please abide by the TOS and this includes HeartSong. What I believe HeartSong is trying to say is that she never received the email on this particuliar warning which resulted in the 3 day ban as the other warnings would have been sent by IM and email. This one was only by email because the IM wouldn't have been seen by her until after the ban was lifted. We don't want to ban anyone this is why we give several warnings first to try and get the member to comply with our TOS. When they don't then we have to take the next step. We try our best to make things consistent and fair. Maybe it doesn't always seem that way on the outside looking in as someone above stated. But we get a team consensus before any action at all is taken. And of course if someone doesn't agree with the decision, mods will tell them to contact Spike in the past and now me. I did speak with HeartSong on the phone and went over any incidents and issues surrounding the 3 day ban. Thank you, Stacey Community Manager

Dear Elisabyte,
Even if Heart'Song were the biggest trouble maker in the world (which is really not the case), she had to be treated like the others, equally. That is called "justice", a notion apparently foreign here. I find quite shameful that the mods themselves do admit to treat people differently according to their personnal opinion: "this is a trouble maker, he criticizes the Hot20, he gives critical comments on famous/appreciated/popular fellows/friends, OK, we'll get rid of him!"
This is how it works. Mods can still pretend it is not, the facts are the facts.

Message edited on: 03/12/2005 09:53

We don't want to ban anyone this is why we give several warnings first to try and get the member to comply with our TOS. As someone previously pointed out, perhaps it is the TOS that is the problem, and not the members. The growing influence of the moral majority is coming down hard on every facet of our lives right now. Being that some people come here to get away from stress, we really don't need it here too. I'm not saying that we should turn this into another Renderotica, but "fairy art" is hardly pornographic. 8-(

1. Have you tried contacting Spike? He doesn't always side with us, you know. 2. I did not state that you were sickening, only your analogy. 3. Hooray for the other sites that allowed your image. It is not allowed here. Those are our rules. 4. No one is being abused. If members don't follow the rules set forth in the TOS (which all members agree to abide by when you join, and it is the members' responsibility as a member to make sure you understand them) there are consequences. Repeat offenses result in bannings, from 3 days to forever. 5. Either it was an erection, or you morphed it to be one heck of a long penis that's just hanging there. The simple fact is this. The original argument was that Heart'Song felt that it was unfair that her fae images were deleted, and, after at least 3 warnings, she received a short ban. She states that she didn't receive warning, however she did. Were it not against the TOS and unethical to broadcast the specifics, I would do so. Her images depicted nude renders of fae folk, many of whom would have been considered to be around 12-15 if they did not have wings or elven ears. We have to take that into consideration. This was not, and is not, and will not be turned into, a witchhunt against Heart'Song, or the Mod/Admin/Coords of this site. I agree wholeheartedly that the author cannot be held responsible if someone gets pervertedly excited at an image of an underage nude. The fact remains that the TOS states that underage nudity is not allowed. I highly doubt that will change. MorriganShadow Poser Coordinator

Sitemail | Freestuff | Craftythings | Youtube|

Knowledge is knowing a tomato is a fruit. Wisdom is not putting it into a fruit salad.

Olivier, We have a GREAT mod team and you are completely wrong about the process or how it works. They work VERY hard and should be appreciated for all they do. As Carolly stated above (Thank you Carolly) she is not a mod any longer but now as a member she knows that we don't do things the way you are insisting we do. And the decisions we make, we are comfortable with as its a group decision. Thank you Stacey

Oh wow, now I'm really confused!!! None of the removed pictures that got me banned showed children with genitalia, and none had sexual content. One of the pictures wasn't even a nude, and def wasn't a child - she had a bottom on, but the mods said the bottom "brought attention to her genitals"!!!!!! I just read the TOS portion that hauksdottir posted above, and all it says is "no genitalia and no erotic content" on underage humanoids. I feel like I'm going nuts!! Will somebody PLEASE explain what the heck is going on? The only characters I've depicted with full genitalia have clearly developed breasts and other physical characteristics of adults, and certainly weren't in erotic situations. How can that possibly be a violation? PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE CLARIFY!!!!! This is so depressing. I feel weird and sick and sad. P.S. elizabyte: I don't think the admin meant to say that I RECEIVED notification, I think they meant to say that they sent it. They prolly weren't trying to call me a liar. They did send the mail, it just got turned into spam because they didn't send it as an Admin, they sent it with their name on it.

Stacey, I won't repeat, just read above. MorriganShadow: "Hooray for the other sites that allowed your image. It is not allowed here. Those are our rules" The sites I was speaking about use the same tos. Do you have any explanation for the diference of behaviour here and there? "Either it was an erection, or you morphed it to be one heck of a long penis that's just hanging there." Ah! We made a lot of progress! For the very first time a mod express the hypothesis that it might only have been a long penis! Great! By the way, I don't think that long penis are forbidden by the tos, are they?

Stacey ... in all respect, I have to ask some questions. I'm not asking to cause trouble ... but from the perspective of an artist, I really have to know ... If I wanted to create an image of a baby running around nude in the house, arms held high in joy because he is free of the constriction of clothing (as babies often do!) would that be considered against the TOS? It's a perfectly natural part of life that shows the glee that the baby feels at that moment. I have seen it LOTS of times. What about cherubs? Can I put a cherub on a Valentine's day card and put it in my gallery? It's ok for lots of other people to put them on greeting cards ... or should we ban those too? Part of the reason that the staff has so many problems is because the TOS is very restrictive. And what one person sees as perfectly acceptable, another sees as crossing the line. It's all subjective.

The problem, Heart'Song, comes from the tos and their application. You and me may have a specific perception of sexual content. Some others have quite another feeling about it apparently. That's the heart of the problem. Mods hide themselves behing the sacred tos and never justify their appreciations. I would be very suprised you get any helping advice from them apart "follow the tos or get banned...

MorriganShadow: "Hooray for the other sites that allowed your image. It is not allowed here. Those are our rules" The sites I was speaking about use the same tos. Do you have any explanation for the diference of behaviour here and there? Yes. They have their rules and guidelines, and we have ours. "Either it was an erection, or you morphed it to be one heck of a long penis that's just hanging there." Ah! We made a lot of progress! For the very first time a mod express the hypothesis that it might only have been a long penis! Great! By the way, I don't think that long penis are forbidden by the tos, are they? We have rules against the tweaking of nipples and labia, and we consider the tweaking of the penis in that same rule. Perhaps we need to clarify it, because we seem to have to over-clarify every rule for people who wish to jump on the line. MorriganShadow

Sitemail | Freestuff | Craftythings | Youtube|

Knowledge is knowing a tomato is a fruit. Wisdom is not putting it into a fruit salad.

No Deecey- no babies in bath tub- no kids running around in the yard or home nakid- no babies on bare skin rugs- no cheribs- no nudism images of any kind. Also breast are irrevelant- it is just preception that counts- the preception of some right wing nut jobs who are far to overtly sensitive. Boobs and pubs are not the determining factor. Just opinion is!

Deecey, clearly as you descibed those scenes, the pics will be deleted for sure: "No nudity for underage" says the law. Well, the law is stupid. Stupid laws produce stupid systems. Does anyone know Ubu? Or Kafka? "The Castle" from Kafka describes very well how far a system can go in absurdity just by applying absurd rules.

It is NOT that there is sexual content. It is that there is nudity, and the model has the appearance of being underage. Having large breasts does not make an adult! Displaying the genital area of a model with the appearance of being underage IS clearly against the TOS:

"No depictions of young humanoid characters/children giving the appearance of being under the age of 18 where genitals are displayed and/or in erotic, seductive, provocative poses or context. Since age is difficult to identify with 3D images, this will be at the discretion of the Renderosity team."

If the model appears to be underage, they need to be covered. End of discussion. Teenagers, pre-teens, and children need to have their genitals covered. Bar none. If you render an image with a fae, and they are tweaked to look like an "eternally young fae", cover the crotch.

Cherubs fall under the same TOS. No matter what, if the image is depicting a young body (under 18), the genitals must be covered. If it is a baby running wild and free, the genitals need to be covered.

I understand that sometimes fae people look quite young. This stands to reason. However, the rules don't change if you place in your 'description' that they are 300 years old. If they look 12, the image goes. This is NOT a criticism of your art. However, it is an enforcement of the rules.

MorriganShadow
edited for clarity

Message edited on: 03/12/2005 10:29

Sitemail | Freestuff | Craftythings | Youtube|

Knowledge is knowing a tomato is a fruit. Wisdom is not putting it into a fruit salad.

Stupid laws produce stupid systems. Yes, it is extremely sad to watch what is happening to this country. Pretty soon, we will all be forced to believe in the same religion, watch one television station with approved programming, go to approved restaurants and movies, purchase only American-approved clothing and products, and take showers with our clothes on. It is very frightening. 8-(

yup Oliver The a-typical slippery sloap(sp) So- if it's against the all mighty TOS to show the chest area of a mill girl should it not EQUALLY be against the TOS to show the chest area of the mill boy? And whats the deal with the (spike selected and stacked) mods bitching about "pushing the edge". So friggin what!! Art is directly speech.

WAIT!!! Morrigan just said that the TOS says no underage nudity, and somebody else quoted the TOS to say no underage genitalia. Which is it? Is it nudity, or genitalia?? My little baby pics all have their genitals airbrushed out. But they ARE nude. Will the person in charge of all this PLEASE explain, right here, exactly what is allowed, and not allowed in terms that everyone can abide by? If there is no nudity of PT/PS characters and we are supposed to go back through our hundreds of old posts to search for nudity and remove it - then please just SAY so!! And send out an Admin-generated email to all members telling them to remove their old pics that have nudity.

I don't think the admin meant to say that I RECEIVED notification, I think they meant to say that they sent it. Hmmm. Well, that makes some sense, anyway. Still, that's a pretty big communication breakdown (which, admittedly, may not be anyone's fault, per se). This however.... One of the pictures wasn't even a nude, and def wasn't a child - she had a bottom on, but the mods said the bottom "brought attention to her genitals"!!!!!! Huh?! Yes, mods, please clarify. I'm about three times as confused as I was before... bonni

"When a man gives his opinion, he's a man. When a woman gives her opinion, she's a bitch." - Bette Davis

If the model appears to be underage, they need to be covered. End of discussion. Teenagers, pre-teens, and children need to have their genitals covered. Bar none. If you render an image with a fae, and they are tweaked to look like an "eternally young fae", cover the crotch. OK ... in the case of the baby or the cherub, if the leg is positioned to cover the genital area is that acceptable? Do you see why we are so confused? Do you see why you have your hands full with this? What one sees as OK, another sees as being against the TOS.

Please pardon me. I'm trying to post here with a 4 year old trying to use me as a jungly gym. The TOS says that genitals on underaged models needs to be covered. We usually, as a group, only require that the crotch area be covered. I will quote the TOS again: "No depictions of young humanoid characters/children giving the appearance of being under the age of 18 where genitals are displayed and/or in erotic, seductive, provocative poses or context. Since age is difficult to identify with 3D images, this will be at the discretion of the Renderosity team." No genitals displayed on a humanoid giving the appearance of being under 18. That is very clear. It's been in the TOS for 2 years. MorriganShadow

Sitemail | Freestuff | Craftythings | Youtube|

Knowledge is knowing a tomato is a fruit. Wisdom is not putting it into a fruit salad.

MorriganShadow: "The appearance of being underage" Where is the line betwin a teenager and an adult visually? You must have a sort of guide book, a "mod bible", to be so sure of your own appreciation. IMO, as long as you're talking about appearence, your personal perceptions are involved. This means that your decisions are based upon a SUBJECTIVE point of view. Consequently unjust and tyranic by definition. Deecey, you already live in such system. Of course you have plenty of choice, USA are known for that. But the choices you're offered are all the same in spirit. Religion has a MAJOR place in your everyday life: "In God We Trust", does that recall you something? Think of the President elections too: could someone get elected claiming he does not believe in God? ... The worst is still to come and it will come faster than you may think.

I am asking very politely! Please publicly clarify which moderator is correct. Is there no nudity, or is there no genitalia? When genitals are airbrushed out, how can you say that genitals are showing? When a model is positioned so that another body part covers its genitals, how can you say that the genitals are showing? When a model is wearing a bottom and their genitals are covered, how can you say "removed because the bottoms draw attention to her genitals"? When a model's body shape and skin have been created from the body and skin of a 36-year-old woman (whom I personally know and have seen pictures of) how can you say it is a picture of a child? It is you moderators who are not following the TOS, and then you will not explain your actions. You say I have had plenty of warnings - but what use are warnings that explain nothing? I have had pictures removed because although the model was clothed, someone perceived the look in her eyes to be sexual!!!! I still have the notifications, so please don't try to deny this. I, and the rest of the members need clear cut rules. I don't really care at this point whether the rules are ridiculous, or pander to right-wing secret pedophiles. I just want CLEAR rules. And an apology for this ugly madness would be nice, though I don't expect I'll get one.

Oh, by the way, MorriganShadow, I'm still waiting for an explanation on the fact that 5 sites using the same tos as Ro act diferently from Ro... But maybe that question is a difficult one.

Oliver, Yes, personal perceptions are involved. Normally, it is a members personal perception that brings the images in question to our attention. We do put a lot of thought into it, and we always err on the side of caution. I'm sorry that you're not happy with that situation, but until computers can recognize the age of a humanoid character in an image, human perception will have to do. I'm not a prude, nor are many of the people on staff. However, if the character has the appearance of one under 18, it is removed, whether we remove it, or the member removes it. I realize that countries differ in respect to societal perceptions. I, myself, live in Canada, and, contrary to popular opinion, we are a bit less conservative in law than the US, however, we don't have as many artists of all media trying to push the line. However, the servers of Renderosity remain in the US, and must follow the guidelines and laws that pertain to it. As well, they have to follow guidelines set forth by their merchant processing services, as well as Paypal. MorriganShadow

Sitemail | Freestuff | Craftythings | Youtube|

Knowledge is knowing a tomato is a fruit. Wisdom is not putting it into a fruit salad.

I wouldn't count on any kind or form of apology from them. I wouldn't count on any justification neither. I went to Rendervision. Try it and love it, Heart'Song. You're loosing your temper, time and efforts in this place. Believe me: move, you'll feel so much better.

As far as I know 4 out of 6 of these sites are in USA, the 2 last being french. Yeah, now it makes 6 with Rendervision. :) I still wait for a real explanation.

I am asking very politely! Please publicly clarify which moderator is correct. Is there no nudity, or is there no genitalia? When genitals are airbrushed out, how can you say that genitals are showing? When a model is positioned so that another body part covers its genitals, how can you say that the genitals are showing? When a model is wearing a bottom and their genitals are covered, how can you say "removed because the bottoms draw attention to her genitals"? When a model's body shape and skin have been created from the body and skin of a 36-year-old woman (whom I personally know and have seen pictures of) how can you say it is a picture of a child? It is you moderators who are not following the TOS, and then you will not explain your actions. You say I have had plenty of warnings - but what use are warnings that explain nothing? I have had pictures removed because although the model was clothed, someone perceived the look in her eyes to be sexual!!!! I still have the notifications, so please don't try to deny this. I, and the rest of the members need clear cut rules. I don't really care at this point whether the rules are ridiculous, or pander to right-wing secret pedophiles. I just want CLEAR rules. And an apology for this ugly madness would be nice, though I don't expect I'll get one.

Please be patient. I've asked for someone to come clarify for you, since my clarifications were not enough. MorriganShadow

Sitemail | Freestuff | Craftythings | Youtube|

Knowledge is knowing a tomato is a fruit. Wisdom is not putting it into a fruit salad.

While we're at it, where can I find the TOS?

My idea of rebooting is kicking somebody in the butt twice!

No nudity for underage. Consequently no genitalia. Those rules are very restrictive. Once again, I suggest you to deal with some other warm place where freedom of expression has still a meaning. there are some.

Scroll up to the top of the page. Look on the left hand side, and click on "Directory". TOS is a link contained within. MorriganShadow

Sitemail | Freestuff | Craftythings | Youtube|

Knowledge is knowing a tomato is a fruit. Wisdom is not putting it into a fruit salad.

If the TOS is so important for membership to follow, the link to it should be readily obvious, not buried within a Directory where people would never think to look for it.

Here's exactly what the TOS says: "No depictions of young humanoid characters/children giving the appearance of being under the age of 18 where genitals are displayed and/or in erotic, seductive, provocative poses or context. Since age is difficult to identify with 3D images, this will be at the discretion of the Renderosity team." Thanks for the location of the TOS MorriganShadow. IMO it should be easier to find. I've never clicked on the Directory tab.

My idea of rebooting is kicking somebody in the butt twice!

Thanks for the feedback. I'll bring that up with Mods/Admin. MorriganShadow

Sitemail | Freestuff | Craftythings | Youtube|

Knowledge is knowing a tomato is a fruit. Wisdom is not putting it into a fruit salad.

Thanks, rockets. Okay, so..............since the pictures I had removed did not have any genitals displayed in children under the age of 18, and none of the children were in erotic, seductive, provocative poses.......why were they removed, and why was I banned?

Rockets, yes, I just went back and reread all of the rules myself. It says NOTHING about underage nudity. It only says that the genitals should not be displayed, and/or in erotic poses. So a nude baby in a bathtub is OK. A nude baby lying on its stomach on a bearskin rug is OK. A nude baby running happily through your livingroom naked is OK, as long as his genitals are covered (unprovicatively) in some way, including by his limbs. Fairy art is OK as long as genitals are not seen. And if the genitals are airbrushed out, they are not seen, correct? Again, I can easily see why Heart'Song, along with many others, are confused about what is right and wrong. The solution is not to make the TOS more restrictive, but in communicating effectively to the STAFF and to the MEMBERS what is and is not allowed.

Heart'Song you forget the BEST part of the tos: "this will be at the discretion of the Renderosity team" With such rules they can do whatever they want, you see. And as they never feel the need to justify their decisions with objective criterias about the pics they delete, you see what can happen here...

Under these circumstances I think Heart'Song does deserve an apology.

My idea of rebooting is kicking somebody in the butt twice!

wow, this is almose dejavu from the thread 4 posts up :)

Yes. She does. But I would be very surprised she would.

I am still waiting for clarification from someone in charge, and I don't wish my questions to be lost in the body of this thread, so I will repeat them here: --------------- I am asking very politely! Please publicly clarify which moderator is correct. Is there no nudity, or is there no genitalia? When genitals are airbrushed out, how can you say that genitals are showing? When a model is positioned so that another body part covers its genitals, how can you say that the genitals are showing? When a model is wearing a bottom and their genitals are covered, how can you say "removed because the bottoms draw attention to her genitals"? When a model's body shape and skin have been created from the body and skin of a 36-year-old woman (whom I personally know and have seen pictures of) how can you say it is a picture of a child? It is you moderators who are not following the TOS, and then you will not explain your actions. You say I have had plenty of warnings - but what use are warnings that explain nothing? I have had pictures removed because although the model was clothed, someone perceived the look in her eyes to be sexual!!!! I still have the notifications, so please don't try to deny this. I, and the rest of the members need clear cut rules. I don't really care at this point whether the rules are ridiculous, or pander to right-wing secret pedophiles. I just want CLEAR rules. And an apology for this ugly madness would be nice, though I don't expect I'll get one.

As part of the discussion, we also need to be informed of what is considered "erotic."

For example, I have seen pictures of Vicky, with pigtails and a very young looking morph, wearing schoolgirl uniforms and licking a popsicle with a seductive look on her face. Clear erotic intent, and could be interpreted as being a young girl.

Message edited on: 03/12/2005 11:51

I go away for a couple of hours and this is what I find. Very nice. Oliver, I am glad that you find other sites to fit their TOS to your needs. However I believe that it is completely logical that we will apply our TOS differently since we are NOT them. When a jury decides on something they don't ALL reach the same conclussion. We are Renderosity, not RNDA or whatever and thus we are not going to ask them what they would do in any given situation. Come on, not even 2 people think the same. If this explanation isn't enough for you then I believe that the problem is you NOT WANTING to understand. As for the explanations of the TOS. I believe that you (and anybody else) is aware of what an erection is. If the TOS states something like "erection" I think we don't need to go into some pretty heavy explaining about what is an erection... Would you like to get a white paper on erections, what causes them and how to recognize one? It seems to me this is what you are asking (*sarcasm mode off*) Heart'Song. I haven't seen your gallery nor removed pics so I cannot say anything about the baby pics that you are talking about. However nude children are not just about genitals. A baby is one thing but a "preteen" wearing only a necklace that's nudity even if ler legs are covering the genitals and even if you want to call it "artistic nudity". I have no problems with adult artistic nudity, but a 14y old girl doing a "Vouge pose" doesn't work for me as art. As for the ones that complain about freedom. You kill a man, mutilate his body and take a picture to post it on this website. You call it art? ok. You feel like expressing yourself? ok. Can you post it here? no. Why? because I don't think that kind of picture is what you would like your children, nepews or little brothers to see. If you do then take them to Rotten.com or something, because we don't want this to become a "not suitable for all audiences" website just because you feel like posting whatever you feel like. If you have questions, post again. If you "don't understand me", take a grammar book and a dictionary. <---signature---> Free your Maya Opaque3D http://www.digital-opaque.net

nemirc
Renderosity Magazine Staff Writer
https://renderositymagazine.com/users/nemirc
https://about.me/aris3d/

This is true Deecey. What is erotic to one could be downright comical to others. :-)

My idea of rebooting is kicking somebody in the butt twice!

Ok now for the nudity of a person with the appearence of being under the age of 18 if the person is posed that the front area of the genital is showing it is considered against our TOS this include if they are wearing a see through clothing. If the person with the appearence under the age of 18 is posed where the leg or view is not showing the genital area in any way this is ok as long as the pose is not considered provocitive. This is why they are brought up to the team as some walk the line and we have to determin if they cross that line or not. Even if you airbrush the genitals out the area where they are is still nude and in view. Most textures for the childeren come with no genitals but the area is still there. SndCastie

Sandy
An imagination can create wonderful things

SndCastie's Little Haven

A member is sent a warning, two warnings, 3 warnings. As someone said, it is a completely different issue if you don't READ those warnings. However, we are not going to put a gun on your head or take you to the nearest computer so you can read your warnings. It is not our fault that people don't get the emails. If Heart'Song says she didn't get a warning she was either some exception to the rule (very rare) or she wants us to look like the bad guys. Can't be any clearer than that. <---signature---> Free your Maya Opaque3D http://www.digital-opaque.net

nemirc
Renderosity Magazine Staff Writer
https://renderositymagazine.com/users/nemirc
https://about.me/aris3d/

You know this is getting pretty ridiculous. No wonder Heart'Song is confused. Here's what the TOS says one more time: "No depictions of young humanoid characters/children giving the appearance of being under the age of 18 where genitals are displayed and/or in erotic, seductive, provocative poses or context. Since age is difficult to identify with 3D images, this will be at the discretion of the Renderosity team." It says nothing about nudity.

My idea of rebooting is kicking somebody in the butt twice!

genitals being displayed = nudity. You can't display genitals while fully clothed and covered (And my scenario does not allow for the interpretation of someone unzipping, unbuttonning or pulling down of pants or pulling up of skirts) MorriganShadow

Sitemail | Freestuff | Craftythings | Youtube|

Knowledge is knowing a tomato is a fruit. Wisdom is not putting it into a fruit salad.

We really need to get this clearified as we are giving conflicting answers. Our nudity for underage children is no genital area this is the bottom half not the top half of the child. It has to be covered with a cloth or anything that doesn't show it this does not include a see through cloth that makes it still nude, but if the pose is to the side and/or a leg is covering it to where the genital area is not shown this is ok as long as the pose isn't provocitive. Sandy

Sandy
An imagination can create wonderful things

SndCastie's Little Haven

genitals being displayed = nudity

On the contrary. Nudity means completely unclothed. You CAN (meaning, it is possible to in the artistic sense) display genitals without being nude. And conversely, it is possible to be nude without displaying genitals.

Again, differences in interpretation that need to be clarified.

Message edited on: 03/12/2005 12:09

You would remove fae images in the gallery, but you would allow fae characters like these in the Market Place? Is there a different TOS in the MP? btw, I am just illustrating a point here and not trying to single out the merchant.

---

---

Software: Daz Studio 4.15,  Photoshop CC, Zbrush 2022, Blender 3.3, Silo 2.3, Filter Forge 4. Marvelous Designer 7

Hardware: self built Intel Core i7 8086K, 64GB RAM,  RTX 3090 .

"If you spend too much time arguing about software, you're spending too little time creating art!" ~ SomeSmartAss

"A critic is a legless man who teaches running." ~ Channing Pollock

My Gallery  My Other Gallery 

SndCastie ... THANK YOU! That is the point I've been trying to make all along. 8-) I'm glad someone heard it! LOLOLOL

It's not about fae characters. If that image were to show genitalia, it would not have been allowed. That fae is clothed.

Sitemail | Freestuff | Craftythings | Youtube|

Knowledge is knowing a tomato is a fruit. Wisdom is not putting it into a fruit salad.

This is why they are brought up for vote as you can see there are difference's of opinions :O) Now as for the nudity question nudity can be partial nudity as with bottom covered top not. What we are saying is the bottom must be covered on anyone looking to be under the age of 18 if the front view is shown. No genital area can be shown this includes the use of see through clothing. They also can not be posed in a provocitive pose even if they are covered. I hope this is clearer. :O) SndCastie

Sandy
An imagination can create wonderful things

SndCastie's Little Haven

Well it looks like the point is made that the mods can't agree with what is and isn't nudity. IMO you can be nude and not have genitals being displayed.

My idea of rebooting is kicking somebody in the butt twice!

Nemirc, what brilliant examples of sophism you bring us! It's amazing! :D For those who don't know what a sophism is, it is a sort of reasonment that has the appearence (once again) of a valid argument but that is not. It is specifically orientated to fool people and conscienciously make them believe in things that are completely false. First sophism: We are diferent so we act differently. Those 6 sites are diferent one another. But they did the same here. :) Second sphism: If your explanation isn't good for me then the problem comes from me! :D Is your argumentation so weak that you had to say that? You're stating that you're necessarly right and that everyone not agreeing with you is a fool! Oh! Really, Nemirc, how could you say that? :) Third Sophism: You think we don't need to go into some pretty heavy explaining about what is an erection. Precisely, I would be very curious to know your definition in visual terms (so that we could compare with the pic) of an erection. You're trying to hide the problem turning me ridiculous, which is called as "personnal attack sophism". Fourth sophism: "a 14y old girl doing a "Vouge pose" doesn't work for me as art" This is your personnal feeling. It has nothing to do with a valid argumentation. Fifth sophism: "You kill a man..." Your analogy has nothing to do with the case of Heart'Song: she did not take any physical person to make her pics. Here you try to darken the problem perverting its essence. And finally we have this great conclusion: "If you have questions, post again. If you "don't understand me", take a grammar book and a dictionary". How charming and delicate of you to consider us as a band of analphabets. Well, this shows the respect you have for the members of this site. Congratulations and thank you so much to illustrate my words so perfectly! ;)

Nope, I don't need a grammar lesson, nemirc. I just asked for clarification, which we still haven't received. No nudity, or no genitals showing? The TOS says no genitals displayed, but you are saying no nudity. Which are we to abide by? They are not the same thing in the English language. Nude means without clothing or covering on the body. Genitals are the organs of reproduction, NOT the lower half of the body. Please stick to dictionary definitions of words, at least. The TOS says "GENITALS DISPLAYED" So far, each one of you moderators has contradicted each other, and ALL of you contradict the TOS. And NONE of you have addressed the fact that I have had images removed because the committee didn't like the pants the model was wearing, or the way a clothed model's eyes looked!!!!!

Sorry for not clarifying my point...what I meant to state is that it is quite difficult to display genitalia without being nude. Not the other way around. You can, however, blatantly display the genitalia while having most of the rest of your body clothed, that wasn't the original issue. I do apologize for the confusion. As I tried to clarify before, when we consider whether or not an image is appropriate (concerning young-looking characters) is the showing of the lower genitalia, and I thought I made that clear when referencing "the crotch" area. I'm sorry for the confusion that I've caused. MorriganShadow

Sitemail | Freestuff | Craftythings | Youtube|

Knowledge is knowing a tomato is a fruit. Wisdom is not putting it into a fruit salad.

I don't envy the job of a mod here. It seems harder here than anywhere else ... part of that because of the TOS (It's what, 3 miles long now? LOL) and the other part because of the size of the membership base.

But the point I tried to make was finally realized. That we DO have differences of opinion as to what is right and wrong. The staff does, so it only stands to reason that the membership does as well.

That's why I think banning, and the procedures behind it, should be revisited by the mods and staff. Clearly, it seems Heart'Song didn't have malicious intent. At least, in trying to listen to both sides that is my impression. There may be more behind the scenes (ACK!!! meaning more may have been explained to her -- foot in mouth!), but it is not my place to know that. 8-)

Message edited on: 03/12/2005 12:26

Hello? Will someone please answer my questions? How can I abide by rules that even the MODS can't get straight? I just asked for clarification, which we still haven't received. No nudity, or no genitals showing? The TOS says no genitals displayed, but you are saying no nudity. Which are we to abide by? They are not the same thing in the English language. Nude means without clothing or covering on the body. Genitals are the organs of reproduction, NOT the lower half of the body. Please stick to dictionary definitions of words, at least. The TOS says "GENITALS DISPLAYED" So far, each one of you moderators has contradicted each other, and ALL of you contradict the TOS. And NONE of you have addressed the fact that I have had images removed because the committee didn't like the pants the model was wearing, or the way a clothed model's eyes looked!!!!!

Attached Link: http://rendervisions.com/modules.php?name=Gallery&file=details&image_id=4277&mode=search

SndCastle- Post 92 Respectfully- thats a load of crap. Ok- no bottom nudity- fine, legs or other items covering/hideing the bottom half- fine no sexually suggestive poses-fine Then why the hell just last week was this image threatened to be pulled by Karen. Add to it distance, prominent breast, and washed out coloring and lights, genitals hidden by the pose AND the leg crease covered by a plant. http://rendervisions.com/modules.php?name=Gallery&file=details&image_id=4277&mode=search You can not tell if she is 22, 18 or 16 It's just an OPINION thats gets it banned. And a limited one at that. Solid mesurable standards are do-able- breast size (A, B, C, DD), area covered by pubic hair are mesurable. Shoot, even the MP has a mesurable standard of 80% coverage of breast. Opinions are like assholes- everyone has one and most of them stink. Mods are NO different- each with there own political agendia. The failure isn't on the artist side- it's on the admins side.

"It is quite difficult to display genitalia without being nude." "You can, however, blatantly display the genitalia while having most of the rest of your body clothed" This sounds like a contradiction, no? And as Heart'Song said some of her pics were NOT showing genitalia, nudity or erotic stuff but get erased though...

I didn't mean that it is allowed. I meant that it was possible. Please don't twist my statements around. MorriganShadow

Sitemail | Freestuff | Craftythings | Youtube|

Knowledge is knowing a tomato is a fruit. Wisdom is not putting it into a fruit salad.

Another strange thought is that the mods can't agree on the tos but can agree that some pics are not folowing them... Quite bizarre, no?

MorriganShadow, "you can" means a lot of things...

I don't envy the mod's and admin's job either. I have nothing against them. They are trying to enforce the rules. We are here to keep them on their toes. Most artists are anarchists. IMO that's how you create good art. The more rules you make the more an artist is going to push the envelop. And of course this is a commercial site. JV

---

---

Software: Daz Studio 4.15,  Photoshop CC, Zbrush 2022, Blender 3.3, Silo 2.3, Filter Forge 4. Marvelous Designer 7

Hardware: self built Intel Core i7 8086K, 64GB RAM,  RTX 3090 .

"If you spend too much time arguing about software, you're spending too little time creating art!" ~ SomeSmartAss

"A critic is a legless man who teaches running." ~ Channing Pollock

My Gallery  My Other Gallery 

You are the person who answered my call when I wondered why I couldn't log into 'Rosity. You said I had violated child nudity rules, when I now find out there AREN'T any new child nudity rules in the TOS! Maybe you can explain why you said "When the TOS change was put in to place regarding child nudity " making me think the TOS had changed to include child nudity, when in fact it hadn't? The TOS says no displayed genitals. Two of the moderators say there is no child nudity, but the TOS doesn't say that. Two of the moderators say nudity is okay but not genitals. NOBODY says how we are supposed to know what kind of pants "call attention to the genitals" and what pants are okay. Nobody can explain to me how I am supposed to know what YOU or anybody else will consider to be a "sexy look" in someone's eyes. The mods are not helping me or anyone else learn how to abide by the TOS. If you are not just on a witch hunt, then why don't you make clear rules and help us understand them? If you have no evil intent, then surely that must be your goal? To help all members post successfully within the guidelines?

well said JV :)

"If you are not just on a witch hunt, then why don't you make clear rules and help us understand them? If you have no evil intent, then surely that must be your goal?" If A then B. Not B so not A. That is a valid reasonment.

"The failure isn't on the artist side- it's on the admins side."

I disagree with this statement. If a artist is told that a image of theirs breaks our TOS and they then continue to post images that are the same then it is their fault. We as the admins,Mods,&Coords here have a job to do. As stated earlier we do not just pull a image unless it is brought up first to be voted on. Everyone has their opinions. We do not like to pull images as we encourage the artist to post their work but we do have rules on this site and again I must say everyone signed that they agreed with these rules when they became a member here.

SndCastie

Message edited on: 03/12/2005 12:47

Sandy
An imagination can create wonderful things

SndCastie's Little Haven

Please come to some concensus among yourselves concerning what the rules of permissable gallery posts are. Please make sure these rules are clearly and concisely laid out in the TOS in a way that will NOT lead to subjective decision making on your part, or confusion on the part of posting members. Please define your terms and conditions using a standard English dictionary, not personal opinion. Please make announcements affecting the community or individual members of the community via email from admin@renderosity.com so that everyone will receive the information. Please apologize for the hurt and confusion you have caused by not following your own TOS. These are reasonable requests.

"These are reasonable requests."
Normally yes, I completely agree with you and I don't think being the only one.
But what is usually reasonable seems to be unrealistic here...

Sndcastie, imagine I tell you that you made something really seriously wrong. What would be your first reaction? (sending me to hell apart, I mean)
Wouldn't you simply ask why I tell you this?
And if I keep on saying you do something wrong without giving any further reason, would you be able to know why you did something wrong? Would you be able to do the correct adjustements? Well, I don't see how you could. Do you?

Message edited on: 03/12/2005 13:33

Well, this is an eloquent silence. One of the most obvious rule in fair communication is to give an answer. I'd like that mods gave one to Heart'Song finally! One hour is quite enough to type some words that could make sense for us, even if we appear like analphabets to you.

Jus' a thought..and an unofficial one at that.... Numerous sites may indeed use the exact same ToS but will individually come to varyin' conclusions about each piece brought to their attention, and if an image is infact reviewed and they find it acceptable its simply another case of opinion and interpretation which is of course subjective. I personally feel that while the ToS can appear less than specific at times this can be beneficial..how so? and how does an artist know whether they've broken the ToS? and why can't we have completely specific ToS set in stone? There are clear definitions of what is and isn't acceptable and some room either way to judge an image for what it is, if it's unacceptable the member is informed why its not acceptable and the image is changed or removed, and from this the artist knows that what they've done won't be accepted whether its in the ToS or not. I'm sure a ToS can be written coverin' exact specifics for everythin' faced thus far and coverin' a vast amount that is yet to come...but (gotta love the buts huh) what of the art that is creative and 'original'? how can a rule be written to stop a specific unless the writers of such a ToS have the monopoly on all new original possibilities of unacceptability? Simple...they can't, so the ToS would have to be constantly rewritten and missed or ignored by some members and those who already scream that their freedoms of expression are already bein' crushed will scream that little bit louder about how oppressive this site is...and will more than likely remain at this site rather than find a place they feel comfortable with jus' so they can continue to moan...some folks jus' like to moan :p Of course this isn't the only scenario but its one thats sat in my head right now. The way i see it is that if you find you've broken the ToS and it was grey area that got you there you don't get banned for that first offence, but you do get some reasonin' of why...if you take this reasonin', ignore it, and continue to post pretty much the same and you get slapped down whether its in the ToS or not then you really don't have much of an argument. This isn't towards any one person, jus' strikes me as common sense :) Not everybody will come out of any solution entirely happy, but we can all show respect while we work towards...no? ps don't flame me..its my birthday and i really don't wanna have to get moody :p Ever

I must say everyone signed that they agreed with these rules when they became a member here. Sndcastie, normally I would agree with this ... however, if rules change after they are agreed to, then the members have to be made aware of those changes, by some method that is better than what is currently being done. Perhaps one way of making members aware of changes in a TOS is to have a popup window appear when a TOS change is made, and a routine that recognizes when the member has closed the popup. That way, it won't come up again until additional changes are made. I'm not trying to cause problems, only trying to suggest solutions.

After 2 hours, I notice that Heart'Song still don't get any answer. I am sure this is much appreciated.

3 hours later, still nothing. How respectful. You see, Heart'Song? It happens exactly as I told you it would. Believe me: there's nothing good to await from here.

Olivier, We are taking care of things on our end. Answers may be forthcoming, however, you are only dragging this thread on for no reason. This is the weekend, and not all of our staff are even home, let alone online to do anything about it. Please show some restraint and patience. MorriganShadow Poser Coordinator

Sitemail | Freestuff | Craftythings | Youtube|

Knowledge is knowing a tomato is a fruit. Wisdom is not putting it into a fruit salad.

Patience? An answer "may" come? I am dragging this thread on? Did I break another mysterious tos? And for no reason? You mean that begging for an answer to an important question in this thread isn't a good enough reason? Why does it take so long? It did not took you much time to react at my post but you seem to avo answering her specific questions. Why? Why don't you answer her?

Because, as it states under my signature, I am a Coordinator. Most of our admin are not around right now, and one of our Mods is in the process of moving. As was stated earlier, all decisions are made by group consensus. That cannot happen without a group. I have already answered questions in this thread. It became apparent that neither my, nor SndCasties answers are good enough for you or Heart'Song. We cannot make people materialize out of thin air to answer questions for you. Again, please be patient. MorriganShadow Poser Coordinator

Sitemail | Freestuff | Craftythings | Youtube|

Knowledge is knowing a tomato is a fruit. Wisdom is not putting it into a fruit salad.

Hello, I have been away spending time with my child, I apologize for not being able to respond until now. It is the weekend and we have to have some real life time:) A child's bare breasts are allowed, but frontal viewing of the genital region is Not Allowed. Which means, if its a side view and the genital area is not seen at all, then this would be okay. But in HeartSong's images they were straight from the front even though the legs were closed you could still see the lower half with nothing covering the frontal area. We have followed are own TOS in this instance. As it clearly states "No depictions of young humanoid characters/children giving the appearance of being under the age of 18 Where Genitals are Displayed and/or.." If they are straight on from the front and of the whole body of the child, then that is showing the genital area. Thanks, Stacey Community Manager

ok Stacey- then explain why for the link in post 104. When I got that message from karen it was the straw that broke the camels back!!! Explain why it's been banned when it is well within your terms!!!

geoegress, Can you please IM me with the message from karen about the image in post 104? I am showing another image was removed for a different violation and an email being sent about a few others that we had concerned over but not the one titled "Forest-Fairy" you linked to in the post 104 and then you "requested" your entire gallery removed so I am a little confused. I would like to help you but I need to know a little more about this. Thanks Stacey

In french we call that "mauvaise foi". Translated word by word it gives "bad faith". I don't know if it has the same meaning... I'm not sure. As far as I know, Heart'Song told us you deleted some of her pic that were not fitting the description you give. About you specific pic, Georgress, I'm curious to know what kind of imaginary reason they'll invent. Anyway, if they find difficulties to imagine one, they'll probably ignore you.

full frontal nudity was the excuse. she did it all via IM, cause she knows I'd get em. not even a single email either (I just looked)

But it wasn't on the image linked in post #104 right? I see the IM she sent on your member record but that image wasn't mentioned this is why I am confused? Please IM me with the message you received from her on this image. Stacey

Hello again people. Olivier, it is not my problem if you feel like everything that the mods and coords say is directed to you. It is not also my problem if you feel I am insulting your intelligence in any way, nor our problem if you don't like our answers. Now if you were so kind to come up with better TOS for this site, or ideas of what you would think that would be suitable here then I am all eyes. Why are you still here anyway if Heart'Song isn't around since post 114? Anyway, I believe that Heart'Song is fully capable of solving her issues via IM with the moderator of choice. If nobody else is willing to add something useful to this thread I think it should stay like this. <---signature---> Free your Maya Opaque3D http://www.digital-opaque.net

nemirc
Renderosity Magazine Staff Writer
https://renderositymagazine.com/users/nemirc
https://about.me/aris3d/

I think this post has run it's course and we have tried to define the TOS in plain english. I am there for locking this thread. SndCastie Community Admin

Sandy
An imagination can create wonderful things

SndCastie's Little Haven