[โ€“] [S] 4 points 1 year ago

That's a good point, yeah. Much more manageable on a Community-by-Community basis and can let users choose whether or not they want to join communities that allow unsourced images.

But yeah, with no offense to that poster, they're definitely one of the ones I had in mind ๐Ÿ˜…

  • source
  • parent
  • context
  • [โ€“] 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 child)

    I don't think you can viably enforce strict sourcing requirements at an instance-wide level because, like you mention, most posts fall into one of two camps, either it's OC or something that someone found and saved a decade ago. People can do their best with reverse image searching, but for a lot of porn content it will have been reposted to oblivion already and that may not be reliable. The fact that anyone can make a new community at any time just makes things even harder.

    I agree that not listing sources when you know them is at best rude and at worst unacceptable. Not to call anyone out(although they are a FREQUENT offender), but I just saw this post a bit ago.

    https://lemmynsfw.com/post/28978835

    This is literally a user of this site who posts content for free as advertising and you can't even be bothered to credit them or cross-post? Seriously?

  • source
  • [โ€“] 3 points 1 year ago (6 children)

    Not the most intuitive thing, but I think the user you're trying to promote to mod must leave a comment on a post on the sub. The same sub-menu that you would use to remove that post also has the "Appoint as moderator" action.

  • source