A good number of strips will be pre-cropped, or the equivalent. So what you'd really want when the signature's missing is to have the poster do reverse-image as necessary so as to identify the creator, making sure to include that information.
There's also the fact that doubtless there will be posters ignoring such a rule / guideline, ideally necessitating mod intervention. Meanwhile, the one and only mod looks like they haven't been active in a month.
Are there ways this could be implemented though that would not punish people who accidentally posted the wrong one though. You have a good idea, but we also have very few contributors on Lemmy and we don't want to discourage that either.
Unlike Reddit, it's possible to edit the link a post links to after the fact, so it's possible to swap in an uncropped link later instead of just removing the post.
I'd be in favor of that. Not an instant ban rule but more of a "No link provided, please use TinEye or something to find the original and update your post"
This is the key. If someone shares something that may have the attribution missing or is too jpg, the post link can be edited to the better version.
If users are posting too many comics that are missing attribution without following through to update post links to versions with them, then they'll get the book thrown at them and won't be allowed to post anymore.
Here’s an idea: add easily accessible links so that even those less technologically inclined can easily reverse image search. Since many younger users are moving to Lemmy, they might not fully understand all the rules you’re trying to enforce.
If i actually lose my mind and agree to mod this sub in a few months i'm saving this so i can come back to it, I have to look up how to reverse image search every damn time. And one of my first jobs was working IT building computers and programming bullshit dammit I'm not completely tech naive, just stuck in windows 7 because fuck you microsoft.
anyways, thank you Rusty, I am making you Honorary Something. Whatever it is, whenever we think of it, you are it. That was a great idea.
There's a great addon for Firefox, ‘Search by Image’, which can open reverse search engines straight from the context menu. Not very useful for those who aren't chronically online, of course.
Also, of all the search engines, Yandex is great at finding larger image sizes which are typically the originals (or upscales or poor crops). Afaik Tineye stopped updating years ago.
Also, if you like the strip and have the time, help the person out and put up a signature or post the original with a signature, while reminding them that they should have posted a signature as well. These communities are a team effort.
True. Assuming they pay any attention to that one out of an unusually long list of sidebar rules. That doesn't change the mod situation, either, and you'd need a mod to actually add that rule.
Images with the creator's name cropped shouldn't be shared anyway, plus they're usually deep-fried and look like a blurry mess. People should be looking for originals to replace the crappy quality ones.
Well, woulda-coulda-shoulda. It's nice that people are willing to make suggestions and discuss the issue, but in cases like this, it actually needs someone to join the mod team here and then apply their vigilance on an ongoing basis towards stuff that broke the rules.
There are some good suggestions in the comments, like providing a link on how to reverse image search to the sidebar to make it easier to find originals. It would be best if it were something that was encouraged rather than strictly enforced.
For Firefox, there's a super-handy extension that lets you right-click on an image and then gives you a choice of eight different services (or all of them) to reverse-image search. I use it all the time.
Regardless, even going in the low-maintenance 'suggestion, not a hard guideline' route would require an active mod here to at the very least add the suggestion to the sidebar. Currently, there isn't one, seemingly. This gets in to sort of a Meta issue about communities that get abandoned to some extent. It's a real problem across the Fediverse, and I don't believe enough collective focus is happening to deal with the issue.
If you look at this thread, it's full of people saying, "yeah, let's do this!" and "cool, sounds good!" but nobody in a position to act is effectively listening. This is what it looks like when there's a bunch of chatter and nothing actually happens, sort of like a loud protest that doesn't actually change anything.
Yeah, if there's no active mod it's a non-starter. But people don't have any reason to know that's the case. Considering how relatively big this community is (for Lemmy) it's impressive it functions without a human mod as well as it does.
But people don’t have any reason to know that’s the case.
They can do the same thing I did, which was to click on the one mod here and see their activity history?
it’s impressive it functions without a human mod as well as it does.
I think that's what naturally tends to happen when a community hits a critical mass of subscribers, combined with a highly popular subject. Also, this doesn't strike me as a /c with much potential for controversy. *shrug*
The current proposal is not specific enough:
With your proposal every post effectively requires an artist signature. There will always be some valid reason why there is none. Also who should check/enforce this? The single non-existing mod? xD
Keep it simpler and make a rule that says:
Content created by somebody else requires attribution.
Attribution could be an artist signature in the comic, the name of the artist in the description or a link to the original source in a comment.
If I were to indulge in pedantry, the rule would be against cropping signatures, not requiring they exist. If it's unsigned then there's nothing to crop. I like your phrasing much better though, require attribution if you have it.
My good dude, hell has the good food, the good music, the good wine, even the good Nixon(below) (the evil one went to heaven, have you seen the kind of people that go there?).
You also need some way to validate that its not interface specific. The amount of threads that ive been in that have had people complaining that the artist name was cropped, but in my app (voyager) ive been able to see the whole image, is too damn high.
Don't know if I get a vote here, but I am strongly in favour — especially as you've said that it's not necessarily going to be a bannable offence. I think that rules can serve as a valuable statement of intention — like virtue signalling, except without the negative connotations of that term
I find that it's pretty rare anyone here would do it intentionally. Usually that comes from people just resharing something they found on Instagram or somewhere.
I agree people should try to find the original author and post the original in that case. But I think that should be called out instead.
I would say it'll catch people who find a comic already stripped of attribution and want to reshare it, but that's fine - the onus of fixing that / properly sourcing it should be on the one (re)sharing it.
i don't fucking know. some people are merely posting the versions they find and sharing comics they love. some people are actively defacing beauty and it hurts my soul (yes i am being overly dramatic i am a DIVA QUEEN y'all know this)
be fair. treat everyone equally. be kind, try not to get your feelings hurt even when people intentionally try to hurt yours. have easy to understand, clear, easily accessible rules. apply them even-handedly, even to yourself. it's best if there isn't some huge list of rules but like, people will push boundaries. your job is to enforce the will of the community, not your will, so poll the community to get their opinions.
this isn't the mods' petty fiefdom, it's all of our petty fiefdom. it's the posters and commenters that make the community what it is. a lot of mods forget that.
I have a difficult one: the comic is Pictures for Sad Children. It doesn’t have a signature. It got nuked off the web when the creator had a breakdown (I think). The creator disappeared and has since transitioned, so attributing it to the then-published name would be deadnaming someone. How should it be attributed?
I think that's an iffy area, because whats the differentiation between "The image I found was already like that" and someone intentionally removing it.
Unless they admitted to it like some have, I don't see that as easily enforceable.
Yeah, but personally I would do it on a "good faith" system. If someone accidentally put a cropped comic, and someone calls them out, if they edit it back it's fine. But if they repeatedly post cropped comics, they get banned
I agree a good faith system would be best, I think it would be a good idea to ban or delete posts where they have admitted that they cropped it but, I think forcing a must have source or repeated no source type rule isn't going to be a good route. It will disincentivize people from wanting to post in the first place if they don't already have a source on the post. Some may prefer that but, honestly on an already low userbase platform, I don't think that's a good thing.
that's a tough one. I miss PfSD. I loved that one. Saved my favorite strips when they'd pop up. I didn't know the author transitioned. I'd attribute it as Pictures for Sad Children by [name, not deadname], but honestly i'd ask the author what they'd like if i could get in touch.
you're still the same person under there, and were back then, just people didn't know you by that name is how i view it.
The Wikipedia article attributes the strip to Simone Veil, and that’s what their current Patreon goes by, so I guess that’s what I’d go with. I had actually stumbled across one direct interview a number of years after the project wound down, and really appreciated her opening up about it.
thank you. I got really into webcomics when i was going through my surgical processes (gotta hyperfocus on something, right?). I had an RSS feed of my 150 favorite (rough number). I always liked to have a peek behind the curtain and was rooting for the best for my authors
I mean I'd just ignore the dead name but I am not trans, I am probably not the right person to ask. The most right person to ask is the artist, the next right person to ask is the trans community in general.
One artist's opinion: I think for historical artistic works, it's appropriate to use the name the artist used when the work was created, especially if the signature is part of the work. If an artist rereleases art under a new name, that attribution would be preferred (assuming it is actually them and not a ripoff, not sure how to manage that). Old works could still be reposted but with an annotation.
After a quick search I came across the Grand Comics Database which doesn't cover deadnames specifically, but it does have a protocol for handling pseudonyms. I am partial to the term "Ghost name". I might even start using it myself instead of deadname, because they do tend to linger.
I personally would not be including the formally known part in combination of the current name. That can be a very sensitive part of the process and, many when they drop their name are looking to just leave that part of their life behind, and attributing to it would be a link to it.
I agree with the other person, if I had contact with the artist, I would ask, if not I would default to the name that was present when the art was made. but I also would not link to a website as the new website would almost certainly be the current name.
You could also look at the current art to see if they have the sources under the old or new name as well if it was re-uploaded, if so then its probably safe to use the current name.
I would go a step further and suggest that only links to official sources are allowed. But I know that would be very unpopular.
Obviously I use and enjoy this community, but we could be contributing more traffic to their official sources. I cannot imagine more than a tiny fraction of a percent of people will see a comic image posted here and then go seek out the artist's official sources.
On a jabberchat I run, I go one step further and add all XMP data I can find, so fans can not only find the artist, timestamp, etc., but they can also request commissions if open from the <Copyright> value.
I mean, yeah, I used to have to work with (not for) the irs and some people will take a simple, fair worded rule to the extreme extent of the abuse of language to defend a position. And Crab God knows y'all have seen me do the same on here I think it's a trauma response or something merely from working with (not for dammit) the irs. But when you say "don't be a dick" then you have to define what being a dick means and in þree weeks you've got a codex of scripture condemning anyone who so much as thinks of using a thorn to death. Wait dammit.
I dont know how to solve the problem of not wanting rules but people being outrageous dicks to the detriment of the overall community. I simply don't like rules, and i like the people who enact them and their lackies that enforce them even less than the rules themselves. Dicks be dickin tho, and that always sucks a big one.
Anyhoo... Thanks to all of the artists who share their content here. I very much enjoy it. I do my own little single panel comic, but im afraid to share.
I respect that you hold this opinion, but like, one of my best friends is an illustrator and this kind of stuff hurts his feelings. Hurting his feelings hurts my feeling and i only got one. It's personal to me, you know?
120 Comments
slazer2au@lemmy.world · 338 pts · 152d
I am in favour.
FateOfTheCrow@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 111 pts · 152d
Aye
cannedtuna@lemmy.world · 66 pts · 152d
Here here
SpaceNoodle@lemmy.world · 30 pts · 152d
Where? Where??
Zorque@lemmy.world · 27 pts · 152d
There! There!!
HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world · 11 pts · 152d
iamthetot@piefed.ca · 13 pts · 152d
FYI it's "hear hear"
HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world · 5 pts · 151d
It's:
W3dd1e@lemmy.zip · 28 pts · 152d
JohnnyEnzyme@piefed.social · 130 pts · 152d
A good number of strips will be pre-cropped, or the equivalent. So what you'd really want when the signature's missing is to have the poster do reverse-image as necessary so as to identify the creator, making sure to include that information.
There's also the fact that doubtless there will be posters ignoring such a rule / guideline, ideally necessitating mod intervention. Meanwhile, the one and only mod looks like they haven't been active in a month.
¯\(ツ)/¯
HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world · 110 pts · 152d
having a rule tells people "hey we want attribution in the strip so get those versions"
scrubbles@poptalk.scrubbles.tech · 42 pts · 152d
Are there ways this could be implemented though that would not punish people who accidentally posted the wrong one though. You have a good idea, but we also have very few contributors on Lemmy and we don't want to discourage that either.
HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world · 82 pts · 152d
i mean we don't have to make it a bannable offense, we just have to say "hey, go find the original if you can". it's a pretty relaxed community right?
Skullgrid@lemmy.world · 30 pts · 152d
sounds like the approach I'd appreciate.
Also, than you for the mod work.
HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world · 24 pts · 152d
someone's gotta step up
AnyOldName3@lemmy.world · 36 pts · 152d
Unlike Reddit, it's possible to edit the link a post links to after the fact, so it's possible to swap in an uncropped link later instead of just removing the post.
scrubbles@poptalk.scrubbles.tech · 11 pts · 152d
I'd be in favor of that. Not an instant ban rule but more of a "No link provided, please use TinEye or something to find the original and update your post"
ViperActual@sh.itjust.works · 8 pts · 152d
This is the key. If someone shares something that may have the attribution missing or is too jpg, the post link can be edited to the better version.
If users are posting too many comics that are missing attribution without following through to update post links to versions with them, then they'll get the book thrown at them and won't be allowed to post anymore.
RustyShackleford@piefed.social · 28 pts · 152d
Here’s an idea: add easily accessible links so that even those less technologically inclined can easily reverse image search. Since many younger users are moving to Lemmy, they might not fully understand all the rules you’re trying to enforce.
HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world · 27 pts · 152d
This is A. Good. Point.
If i actually lose my mind and agree to mod this sub in a few months i'm saving this so i can come back to it, I have to look up how to reverse image search every damn time. And one of my first jobs was working IT building computers and programming bullshit dammit I'm not completely tech naive, just stuck in windows 7 because fuck you microsoft.
anyways, thank you Rusty, I am making you Honorary Something. Whatever it is, whenever we think of it, you are it. That was a great idea.
RustyShackleford@piefed.social · 11 pts · 152d
If it makes you feel any better, my laptop is still on Windows 7 lol. 🫡
HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world · 7 pts · 152d
So is my airgapped backup
SlurpingPus@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 151d
There's a great addon for Firefox, ‘Search by Image’, which can open reverse search engines straight from the context menu. Not very useful for those who aren't chronically online, of course.
Also, of all the search engines, Yandex is great at finding larger image sizes which are typically the originals (or upscales or poor crops). Afaik Tineye stopped updating years ago.
pelespirit@sh.itjust.works · 13 pts · 152d
Also, if you like the strip and have the time, help the person out and put up a signature or post the original with a signature, while reminding them that they should have posted a signature as well. These communities are a team effort.
JohnnyEnzyme@piefed.social · 6 pts · 152d
True. Assuming they pay any attention to that one out of an unusually long list of sidebar rules. That doesn't change the mod situation, either, and you'd need a mod to actually add that rule.
samus12345@sh.itjust.works · 23 pts · 152d
Images with the creator's name cropped shouldn't be shared anyway, plus they're usually deep-fried and look like a blurry mess. People should be looking for originals to replace the crappy quality ones.
JohnnyEnzyme@piefed.social · 3 pts · 152d
Well, woulda-coulda-shoulda. It's nice that people are willing to make suggestions and discuss the issue, but in cases like this, it actually needs someone to join the mod team here and then apply their vigilance on an ongoing basis towards stuff that broke the rules.
samus12345@sh.itjust.works · 5 pts · 152d
There are some good suggestions in the comments, like providing a link on how to reverse image search to the sidebar to make it easier to find originals. It would be best if it were something that was encouraged rather than strictly enforced.
JohnnyEnzyme@piefed.social · 3 pts · 152d
For Firefox, there's a super-handy extension that lets you right-click on an image and then gives you a choice of eight different services (or all of them) to reverse-image search. I use it all the time.
Regardless, even going in the low-maintenance 'suggestion, not a hard guideline' route would require an active mod here to at the very least add the suggestion to the sidebar. Currently, there isn't one, seemingly. This gets in to sort of a Meta issue about communities that get abandoned to some extent. It's a real problem across the Fediverse, and I don't believe enough collective focus is happening to deal with the issue.
If you look at this thread, it's full of people saying, "yeah, let's do this!" and "cool, sounds good!" but nobody in a position to act is effectively listening. This is what it looks like when there's a bunch of chatter and nothing actually happens, sort of like a loud protest that doesn't actually change anything.
samus12345@sh.itjust.works · 3 pts · 152d
Yeah, if there's no active mod it's a non-starter. But people don't have any reason to know that's the case. Considering how relatively big this community is (for Lemmy) it's impressive it functions without a human mod as well as it does.
JohnnyEnzyme@piefed.social · 2 pts · 152d
They can do the same thing I did, which was to click on the one mod here and see their activity history?
I think that's what naturally tends to happen when a community hits a critical mass of subscribers, combined with a highly popular subject. Also, this doesn't strike me as a /c with much potential for controversy. *shrug*
Deestan@lemmy.world · 12 pts · 152d
Nah, they can just not perpetuate stolen art. Keep it easy.
JohnnyEnzyme@piefed.social · 4 pts · 152d
Sure, wave your magic wand and make that happen.
Deestan@lemmy.world · 7 pts · 152d
Sir, this is a post about discussing posting rules?
JohnnyEnzyme@piefed.social · 2 pts · 152d
Yeah, and I'm implying that things aren't going to happen just by wishful thinking.
whaleross@lemmy.world · 6 pts · 152d
It is possible to add more mods. Maybe OP is interested.
JohnnyEnzyme@piefed.social · 6 pts · 152d
I think that's the most practical solution here, and something I was hoping OP would realise at some point. Be the change, and all that.
@heythisisnttheymca@lemmy.world
HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 152d
i have reasons i can't mod, especially right now, but maybe in a few months.
CmdrShepard49@sh.itjust.works · 3 pts · 152d
This is where I land as well. I fully support giving creators their credit, but this seems like a lot of red tape for very little payoff.
carrylex@lemmy.world · 96 pts · 152d
The way to hell is paved with good intensions...
The current proposal is not specific enough: With your proposal every post effectively requires an artist signature. There will always be some valid reason why there is none. Also who should check/enforce this? The single non-existing mod? xD
Keep it simpler and make a rule that says: Content created by somebody else requires attribution.
Attribution could be an artist signature in the comic, the name of the artist in the description or a link to the original source in a comment.
agent_nycto@lemmy.world · 32 pts · 151d
If I were to indulge in pedantry, the rule would be against cropping signatures, not requiring they exist. If it's unsigned then there's nothing to crop. I like your phrasing much better though, require attribution if you have it.
knatschus@discuss.tchncs.de · 24 pts · 151d
This comment alone should qualify you to become the second non-existing mod
kunaltyagi@programming.dev · 10 pts · 151d
Sensible. Updoots all the way
HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world · 7 pts · 151d
My good dude, hell has the good food, the good music, the good wine, even the good Nixon(below) (the evil one went to heaven, have you seen the kind of people that go there?).
webp@mander.xyz · 6 pts · 151d
If there is no signature to begin with it cannot be cropped out
unit327@lemmy.zip · 73 pts · 151d
MOTION TO MAKE A RULE THAT USING ALL CAPS IS AGAINST THE RULES
SoloPhoenyx@lemmy.world · 46 pts · 151d
OVERRULED
HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world · 25 pts · 151d
Rentlar@lemmy.ca · 44 pts · 152d
If there's no conveniently available version with the artist credit in the image, a link to the artist's page in the post body I think would suffice.
HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world · 41 pts · 152d
HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world · 39 pts · 152d
you can't second your own motion stop talking to yourself
naught@sh.itjust.works · 14 pts · 152d
my only regret is that i have boneitis
HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world · 5 pts · 152d
i don't regret my boneitis
HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world · 33 pts · 152d
honestly this is mostly because i'm about to bike out and help my comic book buddy with his taxes. but c'mon people, be respectful to the artists.
Sc00ter@lemmy.zip · 27 pts · 151d
You also need some way to validate that its not interface specific. The amount of threads that ive been in that have had people complaining that the artist name was cropped, but in my app (voyager) ive been able to see the whole image, is too damn high.
goferking0@lemmy.sdf.org · 22 pts · 151d
On other hand there are those who say they intentionally removed them because they don't like them.
But either way if interface cutting it off would be easy to show for the mods or others I thread
kieron115@startrek.website · 11 pts · 151d
seems like the answer in that situation would be to ban those posters.
goferking0@lemmy.sdf.org · 9 pts · 151d
Exactly, but my guess is that poster is one of the main reasons for this rule change request
GardenVarietyAnxiety@lemmy.world · 24 pts · 152d
I'm not a regular here, but this feels perfectly sensible
Flax_vert@feddit.uk · 19 pts · 152d
yeah fair, unless if it's stonetoss
HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world · 20 pts · 152d
fair but they banned
Flax_vert@feddit.uk · 2 pts · 151d
Doesn't say so in rules
HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 151d
It's not from the rules
LiveLM@lemmy.zip · 3 pts · 152d
Might even be funnier if it's a completely distorted version of his comic but it still has his signature
HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 151d
i mean okay but if i decide to mod i reserve the right to be a petty tyrant around pebblespew comics
WhiteRice@lemmy.ml · 18 pts · 152d
HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world · 31 pts · 152d
this ain't my art. this is your art.
also: LIGHT MODE AAA
AnarchistArtificer@slrpnk.net · 15 pts · 152d
Don't know if I get a vote here, but I am strongly in favour — especially as you've said that it's not necessarily going to be a bannable offence. I think that rules can serve as a valuable statement of intention — like virtue signalling, except without the negative connotations of that term
HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 151d
everyone gets a vote and no one gets a vote. I just wanted to spark a discussion and get consensus
RustyNova@lemmy.world · 14 pts · 152d
I was about to make a comic about this tonight lol
(I know it goes against the one comic per week limit but it seems like nobody is respecting it, yet respecting not spamming)
HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world · 8 pts · 152d
i want to see it!
RustyNova@lemmy.world · 7 pts · 152d
Stay tuned to this community! You should be able to see it soon
ripcord@lemmy.world · 14 pts · 152d
I find that it's pretty rare anyone here would do it intentionally. Usually that comes from people just resharing something they found on Instagram or somewhere.
I agree people should try to find the original author and post the original in that case. But I think that should be called out instead.
Edit: This comment is redundant, but oh well
HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world · 8 pts · 152d
no worries. I both like and want to hear your opinion
Zikeji@programming.dev · 12 pts · 152d
I would say it'll catch people who find a comic already stripped of attribution and want to reshare it, but that's fine - the onus of fixing that / properly sourcing it should be on the one (re)sharing it.
sheridan@lemmy.world · 12 pts · 152d
Why are people cropping out signatures?
HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world · 17 pts · 152d
i don't fucking know. some people are merely posting the versions they find and sharing comics they love. some people are actively defacing beauty and it hurts my soul (yes i am being overly dramatic i am a DIVA QUEEN y'all know this)
Ghyste@sh.itjust.works · 10 pts · 150d
We need an active mod in this community. Any suggestions? I have no experience.
HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world · 5 pts · 150d
be fair. treat everyone equally. be kind, try not to get your feelings hurt even when people intentionally try to hurt yours. have easy to understand, clear, easily accessible rules. apply them even-handedly, even to yourself. it's best if there isn't some huge list of rules but like, people will push boundaries. your job is to enforce the will of the community, not your will, so poll the community to get their opinions.
this isn't the mods' petty fiefdom, it's all of our petty fiefdom. it's the posters and commenters that make the community what it is. a lot of mods forget that.
thesohoriots@lemmy.world · 8 pts · 152d
I have a difficult one: the comic is Pictures for Sad Children. It doesn’t have a signature. It got nuked off the web when the creator had a breakdown (I think). The creator disappeared and has since transitioned, so attributing it to the then-published name would be deadnaming someone. How should it be attributed?
RustyNova@lemmy.world · 30 pts · 152d
This is more of a matter of not removing artist credits that were there. If it never existed then it's fine.
Pika@sh.itjust.works · 1 pts · 149d
I think that's an iffy area, because whats the differentiation between "The image I found was already like that" and someone intentionally removing it.
Unless they admitted to it like some have, I don't see that as easily enforceable.
RustyNova@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 149d
Yeah, but personally I would do it on a "good faith" system. If someone accidentally put a cropped comic, and someone calls them out, if they edit it back it's fine. But if they repeatedly post cropped comics, they get banned
Pika@sh.itjust.works · 1 pts · 148d
I agree a good faith system would be best, I think it would be a good idea to ban or delete posts where they have admitted that they cropped it but, I think forcing a must have source or repeated no source type rule isn't going to be a good route. It will disincentivize people from wanting to post in the first place if they don't already have a source on the post. Some may prefer that but, honestly on an already low userbase platform, I don't think that's a good thing.
HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world · 10 pts · 152d
that's a tough one. I miss PfSD. I loved that one. Saved my favorite strips when they'd pop up. I didn't know the author transitioned. I'd attribute it as Pictures for Sad Children by [name, not deadname], but honestly i'd ask the author what they'd like if i could get in touch.
you're still the same person under there, and were back then, just people didn't know you by that name is how i view it.
thesohoriots@lemmy.world · 15 pts · 152d
The Wikipedia article attributes the strip to Simone Veil, and that’s what their current Patreon goes by, so I guess that’s what I’d go with. I had actually stumbled across one direct interview a number of years after the project wound down, and really appreciated her opening up about it.
HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world · 6 pts · 152d
thank you. I got really into webcomics when i was going through my surgical processes (gotta hyperfocus on something, right?). I had an RSS feed of my 150 favorite (rough number). I always liked to have a peek behind the curtain and was rooting for the best for my authors
Nurse_Robot@lemmy.world · 8 pts · 152d
Art by Current Name (formally known as Dead Name) would be my best guess
HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 152d
I mean I'd just ignore the dead name but I am not trans, I am probably not the right person to ask. The most right person to ask is the artist, the next right person to ask is the trans community in general.
queerlilhayseed@piefed.blahaj.zone · 4 pts · 152d
One artist's opinion: I think for historical artistic works, it's appropriate to use the name the artist used when the work was created, especially if the signature is part of the work. If an artist rereleases art under a new name, that attribution would be preferred (assuming it is actually them and not a ripoff, not sure how to manage that). Old works could still be reposted but with an annotation.
After a quick search I came across the Grand Comics Database which doesn't cover deadnames specifically, but it does have a protocol for handling pseudonyms. I am partial to the term "Ghost name". I might even start using it myself instead of deadname, because they do tend to linger.
Pika@sh.itjust.works · 1 pts · 148d
I personally would not be including the formally known part in combination of the current name. That can be a very sensitive part of the process and, many when they drop their name are looking to just leave that part of their life behind, and attributing to it would be a link to it.
I agree with the other person, if I had contact with the artist, I would ask, if not I would default to the name that was present when the art was made. but I also would not link to a website as the new website would almost certainly be the current name.
You could also look at the current art to see if they have the sources under the old or new name as well if it was re-uploaded, if so then its probably safe to use the current name.
That's pretty tough.
iamthetot@piefed.ca · 7 pts · 152d
I would go a step further and suggest that only links to official sources are allowed. But I know that would be very unpopular.
Obviously I use and enjoy this community, but we could be contributing more traffic to their official sources. I cannot imagine more than a tiny fraction of a percent of people will see a comic image posted here and then go seek out the artist's official sources.
Grimy@lemmy.world · 7 pts · 152d
I'm guessing there must be a reverse image search API. Maybe making an attribution bot is possible. Just a thought.
mesamunefire@piefed.social · 6 pts · 152d
I like it.
Diplomjodler3@lemmy.world · 6 pts · 152d
Seconded.
justkevin@feddit.org · 4 pts · 152d
Shut up and take my money
Ilovethebomb@sh.itjust.works · 4 pts · 152d
I support this.
AntiBullyRanger@ani.social · 4 pts · 152d
On a jabberchat I run, I go one step further and add all XMP data I can find, so fans can not only find the artist, timestamp, etc., but they can also request commissions if open from the
<Copyright>value.grue@lemmy.world · 5 pts · 152d
A what?
::: spoiler spoiler
(I know what XMPP is; I just think "jabberchat" has a funny similarity to Jabberjaw.) :::
RoddyStiggs@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 3 pts · 152d
Unless it's a maga political cartoon. Otherwise yes.
HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world · 16 pts · 152d
Even then I still think citations are important. Gotta know where to throw tomatoes and cabbages
FudgyMcTubbs@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 152d
I'm opposed to rules, but I support this philosophy. It would be a nice request to make of everyone who shares something.
HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 152d
I mean, yeah, I used to have to work with (not for) the irs and some people will take a simple, fair worded rule to the extreme extent of the abuse of language to defend a position. And Crab God knows y'all have seen me do the same on here I think it's a trauma response or something merely from working with (not for dammit) the irs. But when you say "don't be a dick" then you have to define what being a dick means and in þree weeks you've got a codex of scripture condemning anyone who so much as thinks of using a thorn to death. Wait dammit.
FudgyMcTubbs@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 152d
"Dont be a dick" is a fine philosophy.
I dont know how to solve the problem of not wanting rules but people being outrageous dicks to the detriment of the overall community. I simply don't like rules, and i like the people who enact them and their lackies that enforce them even less than the rules themselves. Dicks be dickin tho, and that always sucks a big one.
Anyhoo... Thanks to all of the artists who share their content here. I very much enjoy it. I do my own little single panel comic, but im afraid to share.
HubertManne@piefed.social · 2 pts · 152d
I dunno. I feel that rule is very unfair to scott.
HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 151d
Also John warning nsfw but like, not that way
HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 151d
i would love to see it if you just want to dm me a link. like, you know that one with the postits and the chickens? I love that one.
Every time someone tells me they have a comic i subscribe to it.
grue@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 152d
Aye
ivanafterall@lemmy.world · -2 pts · 151d
COUNTER-PROPOSAL: CROPPING THE ARTIST'S SIGNATURE IS NOW MANDATORY.
HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world · 5 pts · 151d
HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 151d
Beep@lemmus.org · -44 pts · 152d
I disagree strongly.
I recommend adding a encouragement for watermark free comics.
HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world · 23 pts · 152d
I respect that you hold this opinion, but like, one of my best friends is an illustrator and this kind of stuff hurts his feelings. Hurting his feelings hurts my feeling and i only got one. It's personal to me, you know?
surewhynotlem@lemmy.world · 12 pts · 152d
Lol, this guy.
Beep@lemmus.org · -30 pts · 152d
LOL this dude.
LiveLM@lemmy.zip · 12 pts · 152d
I understand not wanting watermarks on like, a wallpaper community but comics?
moakley@lemmy.world · 12 pts · 152d
Why?
Beep@lemmus.org · -32 pts · 151d
Don't like looking at ads.
moakley@lemmy.world · 25 pts · 151d
You think that giving artists credit for their work is the same as "looking at ads"?
I'm speechless. Truly dumbfounded. There are so many ways to respond, and none of them quite suit the unique situation that's going on in your head.
HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world · 22 pts · 151d
My friend, it's not an ad. It's "hey, I did this. This is my work."
The ad is "here is more of my work and this is how much it costs". Do you see that in a watermark or signature? Ads encourage the exchange of money.