Publisher site: https://www.pclpublications.com/ The nude is a timeless subject that has fascinated photographers and artists for centuries. If you approach it with respect and creativity, you can capture stunning artistic images of the human form. In this series, we’ll introduce you to the world of fine art nude photography. From the equipment you need to get started to the essential photographic techniques that are the basis for all great photography. Then, we’ll inspire you with some creative projects to help you take your skills to the next level. 80 pages | True PDF | 26.4 MB Hidden Content: **Hidden Content: You must click 'Like' before you can see the hidden data contained here.**
Hey @troxx - thanks for the share! Please remember that the rules require that every post must list the creator's site where people can purchase the product from. I just noticed that many of your magazine posts are missing that required bit of info. Also, the metadata automatically read by my browser for this file lists downmagaz.net as the source when I pulled up your link to download - which is fine (third party sites are allowed now) - but the new rule updates require the source to be disclosed in the OP if the product didn't come directly from the creator. I've attempted to fix your post for you, but you may want to check my work as I was relying on reverse image searches and the like. Please remember to include all the required information from the posting requirements in the future.
@curiousdude , as much as I appreciate your efforts in cleaning up the forum and enforcing the rules (and I admit I need to get better in placing links to the original creator), I do not see any sense in linking to intermediate hosters of the content. The idea of linking to the original URL is that people can inform themselves about the download content, if it is worth investing e.g. in a Gold status to download the content or the time it takes for larger content, etc. I do not see the new rule requiring the source to be named if the product doesn't come directly from the creator. What is the use anyway?! I do not want to start a discussion off topic here. As always I prefer the direct approach via PM.
What's that saying... "I don't make the rules, I just work here" - I'll explain the best that I can based on what I understand, but @george and @h1ghm1nd make the rules so if you need better explanation than what I can give, you can always DM them, too. I'll follow up to your DM, but some of this is useful to address transparently "in front of" others, too, so I'll briefly respond, but leave it at that so as not to derail your post. See item 14: https://p-v.club/threads/posting-guidelines.20/ Admins implemented this new rule in June after opening up discussion about the previous rule which prohibited content from all 3rd party sites and the rule prohibiting low-quality and incomplete content. People were violating these rules so much that admins were trying to decide what to do about it. In the end, instead of doubling down, they decided to relax those rules - they decided to allow content obtained via 3rd party sites, but with the new requirement to disclose the source so that people know where it actually came from and they decided to allow incomplete content with the caveat that if someone posts a complete version later, the incomplete version will get deleted (so as to still disincentivize low quality/incomplete posts). It's all documented in the rule change tracker: https://p-v.club/threads/p-v-club-rule-change-update-tracker.62500/
I know you are not making the rules, but you are part of the system.... Thanks for your explanation. It still makes no sense to me for most of the content here in the forum. For my part, I am out of the discussion and most probably out of posting further content.
You're welcome. I think the main gist is that they're trying to find a mid-ground between fully prohibiting things and still attempting to discourage much of the low-quality posts and suspect files that are seen throughout the group. But... I can't speak to that for sure - what I meant by "I don't make the rules, I just work here" was not me being flippant to your concern; I meant it as a caveat that an explanation from me may not be fully satisfactory since I'm not privy to their full thought process when changing rules. I'd encourage you to share the questions you have and concerns you shared with me in private with @h1ghm1nd and @george in a DM (hell, even include me if that would make you more comfortable) as they'll be better able to explain the reasoning that lead to their decision than I can. They're actually pretty responsive if you give them a chance - it may just take a little while for them to reply. And my advocating for/sharing feedback from members can only go so far when I share things like: "Here's an overview of what I'm hearing from members..." It's less nebulous when members choose to share feedback with admins directly. Anyway, I'll follow up with the other points in your DMs over there.
