Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Peter Dransfield
They operate as in-groups which means that when an 'outie' questions something we immediately get someone who steps up and says that the owner of the site can manage the site as they wish. This is perfectly true but usually irrelevant to the question since their right is not being put into question merely the wisdom of certain decisions.
|
Perhaps the lack of wisdom was in bending to the wishes of a very few members of the forum who requested a nude section to begin with. Originally, there was not one.
Per the dictionary:
in good taste -
satisfying generally accepted social or esthetic standards
Of course, what is "good taste" will always be somewhat subjective, but notice the definition says "generaly accepted." Since the majority of paying portrait clientele seek clothed portraits, keeping the focus on clothed portraiture aligns with the focus of the main site. I'm more than happy to take the nudes section down.
And, yes, I do make judgments of what I want on my forum. And personally, I don't care to have erotic art on my forum or have spread open vaginas or erect penises staring me in the face - no matter how well painted they may be. If that is prudish, then so be it - but, some who may be prudish in public can be quite the opposite in private - so your judgments may be based only on superficial social data.
This is not a general art forum - it is a forum intended to serve the artists who do commissioned portraits - and the great majority of those are clothed.