wizardbeard

Yes. Unfortunately, proving intentionality in smaller cases than beep may be difficult. But it's useful as something to lean back on when it's obvious/egregious like their case.

First step would be enforcing the existing rules lime two posts per day per user, imo.

OP believes that leaving in the comic name or artist's signature is "advertising".

https://lemmus.org/post/21226925

They have been caught repeatedly removing them through cropping and other means.

This is a comic by beetlemoses.

OP believes that leaving in the comic name or artist's signature is "advertising".

https://lemmus.org/post/21226925

They have been caught repeatedly removing them through cropping and other means.

OP believes that leaving in the comic name or artist's signature is "advertising".

https://lemmus.org/post/21226925

They have been caught repeatedly removing them through cropping and poor use of AI.

In less terminally online terms: "I think they're a member of a US intelligence agency doing some vaguely psyop thing, not a normal poster"

So, you still don't understand why it wouldn't be appropriate to react strongly in a room full of kids is what you're saying.

It's not an ad hominem when calling out your inability to comprehend the reason for that is the entire point to my comment. It highlights a severe deficiency in your social awareness at the bare minimum, which doesn't reflect well on your ability to discern the motives of other people online. Does that spell it out directly enough?

Fine, let's put that aside. In your eyes, what would have been an appropriate response for Bush to take in that situation? This ought to be entertaining.

OP thinks that artist credit is an ad. https://lemmus.org/post/21226925

Maybe you should abide by the two posts per person per day rule before you start trying to create new ones.

But do go on and tell everyone how an artist having their name and/or their webcomic's name included in the image is an advertisement.

Especially when it's damn obvious that you're using AI to remove the attribution when you can't just crop it out. Not just a weasel, but a lazy one at that.

That's not the community they linked to. They linked to the one on lemmy.dbzer0.com, which should be obvious from the link they used.

So... you fully admit that you could do the right thing, but just won't?

No, it's not. NSFW is shown by default unless the individual user chooses to switch off showing NSFW content on their account.

Is posting something to a more fitting, but quieter community censoring? No. Same effect as far as visibility goes.

What do you have against allowing people to control what they're exposed to?

You're the one that brought up Bush and his reaction. If you can't understand why someone would act like nothing was wrong in a room full of young schoolchildren, then you're sure as hell not mentally prepared to make serious claims that someone's a government plant.