I'm ok with bikini-clad women in included in shots (SXM
or anywhere else) whether for hits or simply because they're good photographs. But I'm also ok with people in general included in photographs as long as they add to the shot.
I completely agree that beachgoers at Maho are part of the scene and frankly, I think Timo's shot is very well composed - the girl is a prominent foreground element, sharp and in focus, and if the plane was centered as per a.net "convention" she would have been cut in half and her presence been far more distracting than it is now. Overall, the frame works.
But If screening is going to make concessions for shots with motivated inclusion of people at places like Maho or St. Barts, the same lenience should be shown to shots like the ones Andrei linked, for example. His C-17, P-40, and Bone side/nose shot in particular are shots that I would certainly click on if I saw their thumbnails, and the human presence certainly adds to them. There is little separating them from shots such as these (already in the DB
These are great shots, some "unconventionally" composed (by a.net standards) and all feature human elements that make them interesting.
Tl;DR - I'm not here to whinge about underage arse, I'm here to whinge about screening consistency. Inclusion of people is obviously subjective. So shouldn't the photographer, rather than the screener, be given the benefit of the doubt? These are people that could have waited/composed/cropped to end up with a generic shot but chose
to include something extra in the frame, why penalise them, assuming everything else meets the technical criteria for acceptance?