Yagho

I've installed both Crimson Tide and Bloody Facials. Nevertheless there's never any blood on my character's body or face. Any ideas what could be causing this?

Another point that's anything but obvious. I'll go ahead and quote myself here:

No one disagrees that there have to be rules. But quite frankly, even if I could, I wouldn't want to post it in the supporters section. Firstly I wouldnt want it to be in "that" section, surrounded by all the kinds of shots you mentioned, because I do not regard it as "that" kind of image. Secondly, if only some 10% ? of the people can see it - what's the point? There is a fine line between censorship and good taste and moral responsibility. - Steven Spielberg

They could be a lot clearer. "Dont show anything of the breast from Areola downwards" That would be really clear. But "no nudity"? For more, see my previous post. Of course. But that shouldn't be such an impossible task. The publisher of the above mentioned children's bible managed. The church manages in oh-so-many churches. Any museum manages. All it would take is a handful of respectable members clicking a button. Let's say 5 out of a pool of 100? But I dont think we're supposed to discuss this. [ No. Quite the contrary. The reason was that the first time I was confronted with nudity rules was the time the shot was removed when uploaded without adult-tag. Since I found the rules to be utterly confusing, I thought the best would be to directly ask someone. Point being I originally didnt even think it necessary to put it in the adult section. [ I've already stated how i think about this - but I wish the best of luck to anyone who tries to interpret them in the future! [ I can not believe all of the staff members and all of the moderators manage to overlook the top image of the top image section for 13 (!) days. And I doubt you can guarantee this - it's not as if anyone could tell who did or didnt see it.

@The Vampire Dante Yes, you have told me multiple times now, and I have no trouble comprehending what you mean. I'll confirm I understood what your viewpoint is and there's no need to repeat. I never argued about it. The rules are what you say they are - it's just difficult to anticipate them if you draw them up with hindsight [that was my point]. But of course you differ on that. Don't worry I'll go without posting material of any sort.

Posted after my shot.

Please don't patronize me. I didnt bring it up when I was first confronted with the topic, because I feared creating a stir about it would just provoke mods. Of course I'm upset it was removed - especially given the circumstances - and of course it provides an impulse for this discussion. I dont see how that compromises the topic's relevance. I didnt ask You to do anything. The only thing You would have to do is being open for suggestions. One thing any boss should be good at - I've been told and taught - is delegation. But I see discussions and suggestions on this topic are unasked for - so back to the original topic: We did? According to you it was removed due to a partly visible areola (not being a native-speaker I even had to look that up). I did a search of "areola" here on the nexus: "Your search for the term areola returned 1 results" That would be your earlier post in this thread. I maintain the rules weren't and aren't clear. I did not and - as far as I can see - could not have known that a few pixels of areola are over the line. And although I'm aware how futile the attempt is, I kindly and humbly beg you to reinstate the picture. Call it an exception due to circumstances. It's always a judgment call. If you work with vague terms as "near nudity" you'll always interpret your own rules.

You totally misunderstood - I meant the Nexus already has a certain reputation (in respect to it's relationship with it's users)

I can absolutely recognize the need for moderation and clear rules - I don't want a porn site either. But that you do not have. The rules are not clear. What does that notice really tell you? http://i50.tinypic.com/dgq5u1.jpg Genitals, that's pretty clear. But breasts? How much of the breast? Obviously not all, then you couldnt even post a char with the forsworn armor. What then? Before posting I asked around in the chat, and people told me the rule is "no nipples". None of that in my shot - so I'm fine? Yes? No? Same with "buttocks". The part saying " characters that are wearing so little that they might as well be naked (like 1 pixel wide thongs that cover nothing up)" is the most misleading - by implication this should mean that anything that covers (significantly) more than 1-pixel wide thongs is acceptable. Obviously that's not how you interpret the rules. And yes, I did read the "Clarification thread" - only to be even more confused than before. The examples of what's allowed in the adult-section - which would potentially be most helpful - aren't helpful at all. 2 don't work, 2 are about combat, and 1 is acceptable because (although showing nipples) it's covered by a skintight suit. New insights = 0 I feel I had done my part by sincerely trying to get up-front approval. And I sincerely thought it was considered acceptable by no one taking it down or even approaching me about it. Having it taken down after 2 weeks and 100 endorsements, I can't help but feel thoroughly taken for a ride. Implementing a concept that allows artful half-nudity while prohibiting smut wouldnt be rocket science either. Putting this issue (and the image share in general) off till there's more time is - I believe - not the right way to go. There are concepts that are "work- and resource-friendly". I can absolutely see your viewpoint. But I'm not sure the course you're taking is advisable. Right now you have millions of users and don't need to care about a bunch being unsatisfied/leaving. But in the long run you're still a platform provider who depends on their users. You already have a certain reputation. (I'm not saying that's fair, but you have it). And it's things like these that make it manifest itself. Come on. You seeing what you're seeing is a handful of slightly darker pixels. A handful of pixels that arent there on purpose, but because I, in contrast, failed to see them. Trust me - if I could now move the stupid branch by 1cm I would. For the sake of argument - a picture from a children's bible and a masterpiece by Rubens http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-XKM2Vdje-3g/T8pEJ33YW8I/AAAAAAAAIVc/NTtqY-x-OrI/s400/Kids+Bible+Story+of+Adam+and+Eve.jpghttp://hookedonthebook.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/Adam-nEve-230x300.jpg

I did. I asked both of you. The first time I naively and foolishly uploaded without the adult-tag (having never dealt with "nudity"-content before) and it was removed within 2 minutes. I approached you in the chat whether I could upload it with adult-tag and you told me you dont know, you couldn't see the image and I should wait till someone talked to me about it. No one ever did. The first one gets removed within 2 minutes and the second one gets by - in Top Images - for 13 days without anyone noticing? Without any malice: I find that hard to believe. I'm sorry but they're not, and I know I'm not the only one who thinks so. Trust me had I known a little more about the topic when I made the shot I would have covered them up like nuns. But I didnt know, so I did what I thought was tasteful. You seeing what you are is nothing more than due to the fact that is extremely difficult to line up everything perfectly - I still maintain there's absolutely nothing offensive in my shot. I mean, for crying out loud, every children's bible shows more than I did! (Trust me, I checked). And every classical painting would have to be classified as porn if you take that yardstick.

The respective areas were covered. Before posting the shot, I tried to get an answer from several mods whether I could upload it. I even tried talking to Dark0ne. All to no avail. So I took my chances and took the shot not being taken down as consenting silence. But letting a shot sit in Top Images for 2 weeks before removing it - seriously???

I just saw you decided to remove my screenshot. The one called “The Fall of Man”. The one with more than 100 endorsements. The one which went to Top Images within 1 hour. The one which has already been on the Nexus for 13 (!) days. ARE YOU KIDDING ME? After 13 days, at least a dozen moderators and staff members must have seen the image and decided not to delete it. And then? What happened now? One single, brave mod decided to “set the world right” again? Or what? Do you have ANY idea how much work I put into this? Do you have ANY idea how much all those amazing comments meant to me? Do you have ANY idea how much it means to a screenarcher like me to get 100 endorsements within 2 weeks on a shot? Do you have ANY idea how devastating it is to have one’s best picture taken away? I’ll tell you. It’s so devastating, it makes me want to quit the Nexus. PS: This is it – what’s left of it. http://static.skyrim.nexusmods.com/images/thumbnails/439096-1344008467.jpg

Quit touching me

I've actually gotten around to make them - one standing and one kneeling ! Looking forward to see them all together! :)

Know the commands and use them quite often but thanks anyways! Actually trees and flowers spawn to the ground, but not the grass. But the floating isnt the big issue, the problem is that the grass looks nothing like it should :/ But I guess you simply can't do it this way :/