The picture is really sexist and objectifies females.

Dunno. I'm just pointing that such pictures may offend some auditory. I.e. site may lose users and advertising revenue.

I don't think the nudity had anything to do with it being rejected.

More likely is the fact that it lacks pixel-level polish, it looks unfinished. For example, there are oddly blocky, doubled pixels near her armpits, a stray background-color pixel cutting into her arm, and the shapes overall appear jagged, and not in an intentional way. PJ's standards for quality/finished-ness seem to be rising as the site gets bigger, lots of works that were accepted years ago wouldn't be accepted now.

In addition, you used reference for parts of it, but didn't provide information on the specific reference in the description.

It was accepted three years ago. Does it mean we are going through the archives and start rejecting pieces which were accepted years ago?

I posted the original reference at Pixelation. Trying to access the website now but it seems to be down.

The reason I didn't post the reference was because it was a nude photograph of my reference. No doubt people would have complained then if I had posted a link to a naked woman.



I deleted the comment in my messages but it was about the picture being pornographic. I think a moderator can confirm this. So it's definitely because it's a nude woman.

I just don't understand the rationale here. Why was the nudity ok 3 years ago and not suddenly not ok now?

Why is that the people who made the vote 3 years ago don't count anymore? It was voted and accepted fair and square.



But that's not even applicable here. As I said, it was 3 years ago, not now. I don't care if it were rejected now, that's not my issue and that's not what happened.

The idea here is to be consistent. If my piece is refused after being accepted after 3 years because of nudity, it means everyone can start reporting "shocking" nude art regardless of when it was updated.

Whatever PJ decides about this will set clear standards about how to about rejecting older pieces.

Hide it! Hide it! Ughhhhhhh! :P
Well, I duno why its revision was sent, no mod would have done it without a complaint. Probably a newbie kid or something, don't get bothered about it (repost it with a brain damage and radioactive hazard warning :P)

This is intended to not be taken seriously, eh ;)

Hopefully the problem will get cleared up and sorted out!

Don't remember adding and did not send back.
I so wonder if it should have been ever added because the original is not very controlled.
Nudity never is taken into account, its normal.
Sexuality and explicit poses are problematic and usually sent back to be safe.

We would never reveal who complains and reports. Maybe that's what happened? I honestly don't know what happened.
You know I would have sent a PM to throw some bacon on the boobies :p

Maybe refine it a bit, since your art has 'leveled up' if that's a way to say so ;)

I have not yet found out why it was exactly sent back. Some other Mod must have had a good reason cuz that's how we roll

Duuuuuuuudeeeeeee! Hows it going

Well, it was the reason provided.

Thanks for trying to find out.

This is getting more mysterious than JFK's assassination.

We want the culprit!

Still pending!

Moderators: Could you explain how things work "behind the scene" so to speak?

I. Do you have a way of knowing who accepted or refused pieces or is it completely anonymous?

II. Can any moderator decide at any time to accept or send back pieces?

III. Is there some sort of delay where you're supposed to give feedback as to why a piece has been rejected or is it just whenever the mod' has time/feels like it?

If there's no delay, maybe having one would be nice. If a moderator sends back a piece, he could provide an explanation somewhere in the forums within 48 hours or something?

It would prevent being left in the dark about a stuff like this and left wondering. If a moderator sends back a piece, he could ask himself/herself if he/she has the time to justify his position. If he doesn't, then he could postpone his/her decisions to later.

Since PJ is community-driven, it seems to me logical that a more proactive approach from certain moderators regarding the dismissal of pieces. I don't think we should be left for days on end wondering why something is getting rejected.

"Yeah, be we don't have time to do that"
If you don't have time to justify/explain a decision than wait until you do.

"This would take too much time"
If you don't have time to moderate than why take the role of a moderator?

I understand that people who report pieces should remain anonymous for obvious reasons.

But why do moderators remain anonymous among the staff about the decision? Where's the need? If a decision is challenged you could then contact the guy among yourselves to find what's up. This feels like a Sherlock Holmes investigation and it shouldn't have to be.

Those are all suggestions by the way. Feel free to disagree.

Thanks for the swift reply.

Since making changes to the code doesn't happen very often, I guess it's pointless to suggest not making it anonymous. Technically however, it would make the management a lot easier if it weren't anonymous so people can be contacted regarding a decision. But there's no fixing this one.

Regarding II: Maybe updating the rules could help to reduce interpretation (as assumption of rules often leads to problems). For example, the idea of rejecting a previously accepted piece is just plain wrong in my opinion.

I remember a member once suggested that we remove older pieces from the hall of fame which didn't the current "standards" of pixel art. Jalonso replied that he was strongly against it (and I agree). What stands for the hall of fame should stand for all pieces.

You could easily word a rule which doesn't require any interpretation at all. Use what happened here as a precedent so that it doesn't happen again in the future. Adapt the rules so to speak.

III: Yeah, I don't think not getting paid for something implies doing less that you could do. I get that you guys are not paid. A general guideline would be nice, like getting a reply within 3 days or something. Just to know what to expect. 3 days is plenty of time to give feedback I would think. That's how I would manage things anyway :D. Keep you guys in line!



That's the warning I got, the one regarding pornography. I'm pretty sure this is what happened:

The piece got reported by appearing in the random art part of the gallery. The moderator didn't check the date for the piece and judged it was pornographic. He then decided to send it back by adding the "pornograph" warning.

Regarding the nudity, I really think it's just because she has big breasts. The model in the reference looks exactly like that. I'm pretty sure if she had small boobs people people wouldn't have objected.

I just don't see the "objectification" here unless you consider that nudity=objectification.

Its added again under the benefit of the doubt and because we simply don't know what happened.

You have been pixelling long enough that you should understand that its low quality pixelling and you can pixel better now.
There is no reason why you can't clean this up and see what needs cleaning :/

Well that explains it.

I was unaware that the TOS restrictions had tightened up.

But I'm sure people were offended at the nudity, that's the thing:





Which is fine as long as it doesn't influence what is allowed or refused on the gallery.

Say thanks you're not in Russia, where they jail people for watching hentai:
http://rustorka.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=2611487#2611487