Well as most of you already know, a certain large website has altered their TOS.  That is thier right, no problems there.  But it is the reason for the change and the results of it that seems crazy.  The new TOS clamps down on the ways that youthful characters can be depicted in pictures posted there.  I understand what they are trying to stop, but the way that they are doing it seems to be over kill.  Besides, I have not seen any cases of what they are trying to stop, having been posted in their gallery in the first place.

Their new TOS would prevent the purely innocent scenes such as two boys wearing swimming trunks having fun in the waters of a local pond.  Also, two of what it think of as DV's best series to date are also now unacceptable by their TOS.

Since the announcement I have seen pictures posted in other galleries by refugees from the change in the TOS.  These were of images that from what I understand were once posted there and now the artists who created them were required to remove them.

My Mom also saw the refugee pictures and she was quite disturbed.  Yes, she was disturbed, not by the pictures but rather by how those sweet and lovely images are being treated.  As she says, their mind are in the gutter and the only reason those pictures are seen as filth is because those who made those rules have filthy minds so they can only see filth.  Even much of church art is now in violation of their TOS!  The famous images of "Madona and child" are now considerd pornographic at that site.  As my Mom says, they had better never visit Rome, all the beautiful statues there would give them a breakdown.  They would want to condem about three quartes of the public art in that city.

The new TOS does not affect any of my works to date.  However, I do have a couple of  series that I am thinking of working on, that if I had already completed and posted there, I would now have to remove from their gallery.  One of the series that I have planned to create is an illustrated story, only a few of the parts of that series that would also be effected by the new TOS.

Now I am in a quandry about how to proced with these two series of pictures.

While, I was thinking of including grime dirt and other such tinting and stains in the textures, none of the images would have any "filthy" content.  I would like to show those pictures in multiple gallerys as I do now, but I don't like the idea of altering the contents of the images to have them fit in with the letter of the wording of the TOS.

One option would be to alter the contents of the images and as a result the story line also, to be acceptable to all sites.  I don't like this beacuse it would remove the reflection of reality that I seek for those pictures.  Another option is not ideal, but is the way that I am now leaning twords.  Create both series as I had intended, post all the pictures of the series in each of the galleries, but omit posting certain individual images on that site that would violate their TOS leaving gaps in the storyline meanwhile adding to the descriptions, saying that to view the entire series visit PF.

Pangor

Well their new TOS has effected me. I had to delete this image below because the baby is only wearing a diaper and nothing on the upper body. IMHO you have to be sick to see something pornographic in this image.

Btw i have Poser 4, with this version the only clothing that comes with the program that fits the p4baby is the diaper.

Oh for crying out loud, You have got to be kidding. They banned that picture for something like a baby with a diaper? Well there goes the neighborhood. Even innocence is porn. That is sad.

They are changing the TOS, MALE babies in diapers are ok now.

I seen it before and thought of it as a really sweet image.  I had not tough about that, but you are right the poor infant is in violation of their TOS.  Sheesh!!

Just like over at PP is had to flag my "After the Evening" for Nudity because of those two tiny angel statues over the fireplace were nude with their nipples exposed.  What was the first comment I recieved on that image on that site?  "Where is the nudity?"  When I asked for guidance in intrepreting the guidlines in realtion that that picture, I was told to becareful.  I was also told that asking the question, I had already proven the need for the warning flag to be set.

I can only imagine how hard this will effect those who specialize in fairy art.  Like my mom says, they (the censors) are crazy.

In talking about this at home, I have come up with a saying:
  Just like beauty is in the eye of the beholder, filty is in the mind of the berater.

Pangor

It's a difficult thing this one. Children's pictures can easily become controversial and those rules has been clearly written to make the moderators' work easier and keep the site away of legal actions, I don't know of what site are you talking about, I think that there's nothing wrong to clearly talk about it. In any case the second possibility would be some kind of religious motivations...

Talking about Posetteforever, we can't share pictures of nude children but obviously the most important think is that tthe picture should not be considered malicious, if it looks in this way it must be erased, even if the author haven't made it on purpouse. I remember to have "censored" only two pictures here, every time I talked with the author explaining why.

____________

     ...paranoid

If they´ll start TOSsing nude faces, I´ll be having a real problem

____________

Hypochondrial rules of a hypochondrial society!
Nothing more i have to say about    

Davide, it's Renderosity that has changed their TOS. I can understand and do fully soport  rules that keep kids from being abused. Some of the changes in their TOS i also agree with. I thought and think that it was /is stupid to think of babies in diapers as pornographic. But i think that they realized that, because they changed the TOS so that babies in diapers are allowed now.  

TdaC";p="19700 wrote: 

...But i think that they realized that, because they changed the TOS so that babies in diapers are allowed now.

I hope so, but I am not sure about that.  If you read the free standing guidelines, it has been altered as you say.  If you read the TOS, it has not been updated, and the guidlines included in the TOS also have not been updated.  Besides from what I understand, the guidelines, freestanding on included within the TOS are non-binding commentary, only the wording of the actual TOS are binding.  If the guideline conflict with the TOS, the TOS take precedence.

Pangor

     Tormie goes rosity to lurk... "Hey! it's raining out here!"

____________

Ok. This is REALLY rediculous!!!       What  can I say. There're worse even than my mother.       Are we living in the Middle Ages or this moderators are TOO religious or    : ?  

You don't say.

____________
I won the Loebner prize !

Another kneejerk reaction from 'Rosity, where they take the easy way out.
"We don't feel like moderating the pics for anything illegal, let's pass a TOS change that's really stupid but lets us have less work to do".
They keep shooting theirself in the feet (or rather, the legs now, their feet are long gone from earlier stupid actions)

____________
Every night will have a day.
Even forever must come to an end. I think...

You can't always decide for yourself.

____________
I won the Loebner prize !