Okay, you don’t get it… it’s about how the system rated you; whether that’s justified or not is a different matter. As for other models, that’s completely irrelevant to your case. Besides, you still haven’t realized that this is probably not about the 3D model itself.
Not at all - that’s the most crucial point. However, as long as you don’t understand that, I think you still lack the maturity to deal with this situation.
You don’t have an NSFW case. Your case is pornographic.
NSFW is not against the rules and is allowed (within certain limits).
Understandably, you might find that disgusting, but it has absolutely nothing to do with your case. As long as you don’t understand what this is actually about, it won’t make sense to explain it further - and that’s probably why support rejected it. Your reasoning was irrelevant to the matter.
Honestly, and I mean this in a friendly way: As long as you lack the maturity to see the difference - regardless of whether MakerWorld’s evaluation was justified - stay out of this whole NSFW thing. Otherwise, maybe they’ll ban your entire account.
I’m just throwing out the my impression, that you might not be of legal age yet – it’s just a impression. Perhaps that’s what Support thought, too.
I’ll explain it now using examples and some photos - maybe that will make it easier to understand. However, I’m specifically using SFW photos. That should be sufficient to explain this:
The cover clearly does not show a real person. The 3D model, the images, the description - none of it is a “real human.” No problem, everything’s fine.
The cover shows real people. Therefore, it is no longer considered NSFW but rather pornographic, and it violates the rules (here, of course, is an SFW image just to illustrate the point). It doesn’t matter what the actual 3D model is.
It’s a 3D rendering. Technically, it’s allowed, but since it looks extremely realistic, it’s classified as a real human and is therefore considered pornographic. (As I said, here’s an SFW image to illustrate). It doesn’t matter what the actual 3D model is.
And now we come to something people overlook: links and descriptions! (Again, this is just an example - an SFW version.) It is classified as pornographic even if the text “is not a real person”, the link leads to real human beings, or the text describes the actions of real human beings.
What triggers pornographic flag, of course, is on another page, but it should now be clear that this has nothing to do with the actual 3D model itself, but rather with the reference to “real human.”
The system is triggered even when there is no interaction with the 3D object because the flag refers to “real human conntent”, not the actual 3D model.
It feels like MakerWorld is getting slammed with semi explicit slop that I just don’t want to see. I added some filtering, but things showing up don’t have proper tags set to be excluded by my filter. I’m guessing there is no approval process for things to be made visible to MakerWorld, not like loading an app on an app store. What’s the point of people loading stuff, they aren’t making money off this stuff right? Like for example one is “anime ■■■(enese?) dragon ball model” it is a girl in tiny shorts, a tube top, none of the tags say: “girl”, “woman”, “sexy”… but it has things like “art”, “anime”, “pla”, “dragon”, “ball”, “car”, “model”… and 20 other tags. It’s not like they generating revenue off these, right, so why not be honest with the tags?
Incorrect assumption
By default, your posted models earn points from social interaction, and points are redeemable for cash value, so yes, they are, and that’s why you see a lot.
Sure some might get taken down or unmonetized or banned in the fullness of time, and penalized, but today is now
