I really don't know the full story behind the TOS reviision, but from the little that I have read, there was a "squeaky wheel" complaining. To have peace they changed the TOS to please this person. However, the wording of the change TOS and guidelines is really poorly written and self-contradictory.
By the way since last night they have once again changed the wording of the guidelines, but the TOS does not reflect any of the revisions sine the first announcement. There are seven key items in the current (for now) guidelines here I would like to pick them apart to show how poorly eritten they are:
In the guidelines is say, "No child nudity of any kind" then it goes on to specificly prohibit, "exposed chest on females, buttocks or genitals" That is an error that says prohibits "exposed chest on females", "exposed chest on buttocks" or "exposed chest on genitals". Other than the gramatical error, this first item prohibits child nudity without providing for exceptions.
In the next point they limit the its statement to "characters under the age of 18". Rather than "characters that [i:ae0f8f5330]appear to be[/i:ae0f8f5330] under the age of 18". That mean that they are talking about any character that appears to be of any age that were created after 1987 can not be nude.
Then they prohibit transparent cloths, censor blurs, blots, or anything witht eh word "Censored" written on it or any props to cover otherwise unclothed areas. Since all clothing are a form of props, they have just prohibited the use of clothing as well. Also if you have a picture of a child holding a mug of chocolate to his mouth, the mug prop is covering a part of his face and hand, those parts are not covered with clothing so the mug is now prohibited too.
The next point is weel enought writen so I won't comment on it.
Next point: Now they say that babies can wear diapers, but fail to mention if an infant wearing only diapers is allowed.
Then they say that they alone will determine the apparent age of a character. OK, I can understand that. But in viewing some of the images that they have already removed they have a very strange way of determining age. I saw one image where the charcter had the figure of a woman. Her her face was wrinkled with age her small breasts were quite saggy and her figure showed what once many have been an attractive one but is now withered by age. I have found that image was deleted for being a nude child, determined by the smallness of her breasts.
The last point contradicts the point about the diaper, it says that in cases where "gender that is questionable on an image with an exposed chest". All babies are gender questionable, so no babies in only diapers. Also the statement fails to mention whcih chest is in question. So, that would mean that an image with a baby (fully clothed) or an alien (fully clothed) will be deleted if anyone else in the image is bare chested.
The actual TOS contradict all these points except for where the first point says "No child nudity of any kind".
So, as of at least last night, transparent body parts is the only way that childern and infants can be depicted according to these guidelines and the TOS. Tomarrow, who knows what the guidelines will read as by then.
Pangor
Subject:
Subject:
yeah...sniff... :-k
They had removed 2 pics of a friend of mine yesterday.
He had tell me about, and now he is thinking about to leave
that place.
His statement calls: "It's easy for me to stay - but it's also easy for me to go."
I think, he's right.
dumbness not knowing any frontiers :bigrinnin:
They also had removed his spnsorlink in this gallery... poor poor people...
They have time to sort pics out - but they don't have time to solve important problems...
Yeah, a real big "commercialty" with a bloody behaviour of amateurish moderating...
I'm happy, that i don't need that place to show my artworks :bigrinnin:
They had removed 2 pics of a friend of mine yesterday.
He had tell me about, and now he is thinking about to leave
that place.
His statement calls: "It's easy for me to stay - but it's also easy for me to go."
I think, he's right.
dumbness not knowing any frontiers :bigrinnin:
They also had removed his spnsorlink in this gallery... poor poor people...
They have time to sort pics out - but they don't have time to solve important problems...
Yeah, a real big "commercialty" with a bloody behaviour of amateurish moderating...
I'm happy, that i don't need that place to show my artworks :bigrinnin:
Subject:
I was born in 1987. According to this rules every nude character must be older than me. :lmao: :lol: I'm not sure there was Poser software in 1987 :-k . What a :crazy: people! :lol:
If their english is not very good (like mine 8-[ ) why are they waisting their time writing new TOS? :-s
Another thing I noticed was that in the store area the promo pictures for a caracter "may contain artistical nudity". So when it's a promo pic it's "artistical" , but when there is nudity in some piece of art it's "pornographic". :-s :-k :-({|=
Quote:
In the next point they limit the its statement to "characters under the age of 18". Rather than "characters that appear to be under the age of 18". That mean that they are talking about any character that appears to be of any age that were created after 1987 can not be nude.
I was born in 1987. According to this rules every nude character must be older than me. :lmao: :lol: I'm not sure there was Poser software in 1987 :-k . What a :crazy: people! :lol:
Quote:
In the guidelines is say, "No child nudity of any kind" then it goes on to specificly prohibit, "exposed chest on females, buttocks or genitals" That is an error that says prohibits "exposed chest on females", "exposed chest on buttocks" or "exposed chest on genitals". Other than the gramatical error, this first item prohibits child nudity without providing for exceptions.
If their english is not very good (like mine 8-[ ) why are they waisting their time writing new TOS? :-s
Another thing I noticed was that in the store area the promo pictures for a caracter "may contain artistical nudity". So when it's a promo pic it's "artistical" , but when there is nudity in some piece of art it's "pornographic". :-s :-k :-({|=
Subject:
I agree with you, Poserkatz. I use that place as a 3d art materials search engine, a source of tutorials, and another gallery to post my pictures in. I have met a couple of nice people there, whom I invited to join us here. Other than that, the place feels like a wilderness to me with a few good artist here and there. I like review the works of those artists.
While they said that there would be a grace period of a few weeks before they start enforcing the new rules, I have also noticed people who had their accounts banned already. In the case of one artist, I first saw the work of day before yesterday posted on another site after the images were banned from Renderosity. After seeing those images, I thought they were very well done, so I searched for the artist's gallery at Renderosity to add to my favorite artist list. Guess what? I found nothing but an empty gallery and homepage. I sent a message to the artist asking if the same username was being used at both websites. I founf out in the reply that gallery images had already been deleted by the site and the account has been permantly banned, for violating the new TOS. What happened to the grace period? In the reply I was also given the url for the artist's own website. There I saw some of the images that had been in the gallery at Renderosity, the images that they were worried about was only a fraction of the works of this artist. And the artist had been removing the images from the gallery as they demanded at the very time that the account was locked out!
I have seen such refugee pictures on several sites, and you know what? They are all beautiful, with no "filth" content at all. In fact, the religious in churches showing the infant Jesus are far more explicit than any of the refugee images.
I am so glad that we have such a place as PF is, for a homebase. Thanks Posy and Tormentor.
Pangor
While they said that there would be a grace period of a few weeks before they start enforcing the new rules, I have also noticed people who had their accounts banned already. In the case of one artist, I first saw the work of day before yesterday posted on another site after the images were banned from Renderosity. After seeing those images, I thought they were very well done, so I searched for the artist's gallery at Renderosity to add to my favorite artist list. Guess what? I found nothing but an empty gallery and homepage. I sent a message to the artist asking if the same username was being used at both websites. I founf out in the reply that gallery images had already been deleted by the site and the account has been permantly banned, for violating the new TOS. What happened to the grace period? In the reply I was also given the url for the artist's own website. There I saw some of the images that had been in the gallery at Renderosity, the images that they were worried about was only a fraction of the works of this artist. And the artist had been removing the images from the gallery as they demanded at the very time that the account was locked out!
I have seen such refugee pictures on several sites, and you know what? They are all beautiful, with no "filth" content at all. In fact, the religious in churches showing the infant Jesus are far more explicit than any of the refugee images.
I am so glad that we have such a place as PF is, for a homebase. Thanks Posy and Tormentor.
Pangor
Subject:
Where did you meet him? Do you mean you and me have? What are you on?
Subject:
8-[ 8-[ 8-[ This seems a serious thing friends... :-k :-k :-k We've not a written rules for the album, it's all based on the trust. But, what's your idea for a rule on this matter (children characters) ?
Subject:
I think, PF need no rule in this case. Here are a lot of staff memebers,
it based on trust and if someone break/abuse the trust, the pic have to
be deleted.
Currently we "artbox" is working on a new site and we discuss those
maybe problems, but we deceide to give less rules and trust in the
common sense - if it will be abused to much and to often, than we
can make other rules...
I think, that's the only way to a "true" community. Seriously.
it based on trust and if someone break/abuse the trust, the pic have to
be deleted.
Currently we "artbox" is working on a new site and we discuss those
maybe problems, but we deceide to give less rules and trust in the
common sense - if it will be abused to much and to often, than we
can make other rules...
I think, that's the only way to a "true" community. Seriously.
Subject:
Sorry, Tormentor, I did not mean to stir up trouble.
In general I would say to continue as we have. So, if you think that there will be a need for an actual code it could just be based on the sort of art that has already been submitted.
I will think on this, and see what sort of suggestions I can come up with.
Pangor
In general I would say to continue as we have. So, if you think that there will be a need for an actual code it could just be based on the sort of art that has already been submitted.
I will think on this, and see what sort of suggestions I can come up with.
Pangor
Subject:
Last edited by pangor on 24 Mar 2005 07:18; edited 1 time in total
How about something simple like:
Do not post images containing lewd displays of genetalia, any sexual
interactions, or contact.
Any image considered unacceptable by the webmaster and/or the majority of
the staff can be removed.
Pangor
PS. I really need to type better then I would not need to edit to correct my typos.
Do not post images containing lewd displays of genetalia, any sexual
interactions, or contact.
Any image considered unacceptable by the webmaster and/or the majority of
the staff can be removed.
Pangor
PS. I really need to type better then I would not need to edit to correct my typos.
Last edited by pangor on 24 Mar 2005 07:18; edited 1 time in total
Subject:
Last edited by pangor on 24 Mar 2005 07:13; edited 1 time in total
I like what Poserkatz said.
Pangor
Pangor
Last edited by pangor on 24 Mar 2005 07:13; edited 1 time in total
Subject:
Simple and clear! :clap: :bigrinnin: :bigrinnin: :bigrinnin:
Maybe now R'osity motto would be : " We censure even the censorship!" :-s :lmao: :lol: :lmao: Just jokking.
Quote:
Do not post images containing lewd displays of genetalia, any sexual
interactions, or contact.
Any image considered unexceptable by the webmaster and/or the majority of
the staff can be removed.
Simple and clear! :clap: :bigrinnin: :bigrinnin: :bigrinnin:
Maybe now R'osity motto would be : " We censure even the censorship!" :-s :lmao: :lol: :lmao: Just jokking.
Subject:
Lol ! :bigrinnin:
Subject:
Perhaps I'm just expressing my own concern about it.
Subject:
How are you today honey darling?
Subject:
My logic and cognitive functions are normal.
Page 2 of 2
You cannot post new topicsYou cannot reply to topics
You cannot edit your posts
You cannot delete your posts
You cannot vote in polls
You cannot attach files
You cannot download files
You cannot post calendar events