You removed my +100 endorsement screenshot? Are you kidding me???

[midhras]

Anaphiel's point still stands as the image was marked 'adult' as well. Mods are then judged differently than images, or this was an oversight/not yet reported. In any case, my beef is not with the rule, or that images can get banned, but that circumstances were not taken into consideration, and are still largely ignored or shrugged off. Common courtesy is all Yagho's outrage requires, if you ask me. What's done is done, but don't leave the man hanging.

 

@ Lisnpuppy: I don't presume to put words in your mouth. I'm sorry if you think I was; you said that if the shot was worth so much to him to post it someplace else. I said that it was not about the shot, but about sharing it with his friends, his NEXUS friends, here. Which is why he went through the trouble contacting management about it. It seems (SEEMS -- I don't presume!) you're all trying to not see this point. He loves the Nexus and its imageshare crowd, has already marred the image in a construed way to try and comply with the rules, gets to relish in the joy of it being hugely, widely popular, and then its all taken away from him quite matter-of-factly. It's like giving a puppy to a child and then taking it away and wondering why the kid pouts. Telling him to go post it someplace else is totally ignoring his attachment to the social aspect of the Nexus. If it happened to one of my kids, I'd think that more scarring than seeing a nipple, by the way.

 

Again, it is not MY site, and they're not MY rules, and as anyone I do try to stick to them, but I do wonder what kind of example is being set here. But I'm clearly barking up the wrong wall. Don't post when you're angry they say. I'll leave it at this before I'll have to go and dust off my dueling foil and call you all outside for a good old-fashioned toe-to-toe..

[TheVampireDante]

but don't leave the man hanging.

 

Hanging how? There's nothing more to be said without (as was said) repeating ourselves.

 

There is one image area of the site that allows images featuring the level of content his did - the supporters imageshare. He does not have access to that area, therefore the image should not have been posted.

 

The circumstances you are trying to include - that he wanted to share the artwork he created with the people here, because he feels they are worth it, his friends and comrades - doesn't actually matter. It was taken away so "matter-of-factly" is because there was no personal intent to it on my part.

 

I do detach myself when doing my "rounds" of the site, because if I didn't I wouldn't see myself lasting very long without getting into trouble myself. I keep my work here as clear and simple as possible. There's no need to throw meaning into the removal past the (now often repeated) point that it broke a rule.

 

To go back to an earlier post:

 

To me, your decision is inexplicable. For a simple fact: I never saw nude people on that pic.

-I saw Adam and Eve. Who I seen as a pair of nude people, which they were supposed to be.

-I saw centuries of (religious) art recreated with the humble means of a videogame modding community. Which doesn't matter.

-I saw hours and hours of hard work to create something that I wouldn't even think possible before. Which while appreciated, still does not exempt the image from the rules.

-I saw a great idea and a masterful execution. Indeed, but once again - doesn't mean it's allowed to be ignored by the rules of this site.

[midhras]

I get that you're scratching this up to the rules, which is just the point that grieved me: that you do.

But I give up. You've bloodied and broken my spirit. I'll never succeed in trying to get my point across.

[Deleted2547005User]

Probably should lock this topic: everything that can be said has been said (repeatedly) and nothing new is going to come down the pipelines for this discussion.

[bben46]

As many of you were not around when the image share was splint to create the newer supporter image share.

 

At that time, fully 80 to 90 percent of the images in the users image share were female 'figure studies' Some quite good, most fairly average and some not so good. Some nearly fully covered, most partly covered and some nude. Some very arty , most average and some borderline porn. But in order to see anything else a user would have to pass through a dozen 'figure studies' for each landscape, another dozen for a monster fight and still another to see a mounted knight in his tin suit. Many of these were by the same 4 or 5 people posting dozens of similar pics.

 

At the same time that the image share was split, a limit of 5 pics per person per day, and 10 per day for a premium member was instituted. The reason was not that we don't like to look at nice pics of partly clad women ( well, most of us anyway :tongue:) But to give other people a chance to see what they wanted to see, if what they wanted to see was not the 'figure studies' that flooded the image share.

 

We don't try to judge the pics on quality or whether or not they would be allowed in a Bible or not - in fact I have seen a very similar image on a stained glass window in a cathedral. The purpose is to move the figure study type image to another section, then because some of the pics posted there are soft core porn, find a way to show the mommies that we were actually making an effort to keep their underage snowflakes from seeing soft porn on a game site while allowing those same kiddies to see the other images.

 

In order to try to make it clear :rolleyes: Dark0ne posted the rules we go by. Since then we have heard every excuse, every piece of warped logic and every complaint imaginable from people too cheap to pay the extremely low one time ticket price to access the supporter image share - either to post there or to see what is there.

 

Note: All Premium members are automatically allowed into the supporter image section - even after their premium expires. :thumbsup:

 

The image was not removed because it was porn. But because it did violate the rules as we interpret them. And we don't want to get into "But you allowed that other one and my pic doesn't show even that much." type arguments.

[trustinall]

Anaphiel's point still stands as the image was marked 'adult' as well

 

it seems i missed that bit of information... if that's the case i take back my understanding of the moderator's point and better stop typing right now.

[BlakkPhoenixx]

Looks like there`s an eleventh commandment: "no nudity allowed"

 

Seriously, reading all this "rules are rules" stuff makes me very sad...

[TheVampireDante]

Anaphiel's point still stands as the image was marked 'adult' as well

 

it seems i missed that bit of information... if that's the case i take back my understanding of the moderator's point and better stop typing right now.

 

The adult tag is for excessive gore, violence and such - the "no nudity" warning box takes priority.

[Yagho]

As many of you were not around when the image share was splint to create the newer supporter image share.

 

At that time, fully 80 to 90 percent of the images in the users image share were female 'figure studies' Some quite good, most fairly average and some not so good. Some nearly fully covered, most partly covered and some nude. Some very arty , most average and some borderline porn. But in order to see anything else a user would have to pass through a dozen 'figure studies' for each landscape, another dozen for a monster fight and still another to see a mounted knight in his tin suit. Many of these were by the same 4 or 5 people posting dozens of similar pics.

 

At the same time that the image share was split, a limit of 5 pics per person per day, and 10 per day for a premium member was instituted. The reason was not that we don't like to look at nice pics of partly clad women ( well, most of us anyway :tongue:) But to give other people a chance to see what they wanted to see, if what they wanted to see was not the 'figure studies' that flooded the image share.

 

We don't try to judge the pics on quality or whether or not they would be allowed in a Bible or not - in fact I have seen a very similar image on a stained glass window in a cathedral. The purpose is to move the figure study type image to another section, then because some of the pics posted there are soft core porn, find a way to show the mommies that we were actually making an effort to keep their underage snowflakes from seeing soft porn on a game site while allowing those same kiddies to see the other images.

 

In order to try to make it clear :rolleyes: Dark0ne posted the rules we go by. Since then we have heard every excuse, every piece of warped logic and every complaint imaginable from people too cheap to pay the extremely low one time ticket price to access the supporter image share - either to post there or to see what is there.

 

Note: All Premium members are automatically allowed into the supporter image section - even after their premium expires. :thumbsup:

 

The image was not removed because it was porn. But because it did violate the rules as we interpret them. And we don't want to get into "But you allowed that other one and my pic doesn't show even that much." type arguments.

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

[MotoSxorpio]

So, you are so self entitled that you suggest Dark0ne change his scope of what his site should be? Boo. Just Boo.