Each user gets 10MB, there's nothing malicious I can see here (yet). I guess we'll just wait and see if this user does anything wrong.

Martin, On Sun, 2016-02-21 at 04:29 -0700, Brynn wrote: > Hi Friends (website team), > I'm reporting images here, until the report system allows for > the > reporter to add comments. (Maybe I should make a feature request for > that?) > https://inkscape.org/en/~UptownKas/%E2%98%85kas > The member may well have created the logo in Inkscape, but > it's a > photo of (probably) his kids (or her kids?). It could be perfectly > innocent > misunderstanding. But could also just be advertising....although > they > didn't make any outside links. Should they be contacted? > Remind me how much space a regular member gets? ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Site24x7 APM Insight: Get Deep Visibility into Application Performance APM + Mobile APM + RUM: Monitor 3 App instances at just $35/Month Monitor end-to-end web transactions and take corrective actions now Troubleshoot faster and improve end-user experience. Signup Now! http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=272487151&iu=/4140 _______________________________________________ Inkscape-docs mailing list Inkscape-docs(a)lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-docs

Oh no, I didn't see anything malicious either. But isn't this supposed to be a gallery for Inkscape images? If any image is ok, as long as it's not malicious or advertising or nudity, won't the gallery eventually lose its focus (along with its audience)? (That cardboard castle image still annoys me. It's less about Inkscape than this one! If this one actually has any connection.) Perhaps I'm missing something about this? But especially with space apparently coming at a premium (BG 4 times in the last hour), won't the gallery and website be better off without random non-Inkscape images? brynn

-------------------------------------------------- From: "Martin Owens" <doctormo@...2...> Sent: Sunday, February 21, 2016 5:31 AM To: "Brynn" <brynn@...78...> Cc: "Inkscape-Docs" <inkscape-docs(a)lists.sourceforge.net&gt; Subject: Re: [Inkscape-docs] non-Inkscape image in gallery > Each user gets 10MB, there's nothing malicious I can see here (yet). I > guess we'll just wait and see if this user does anything wrong. > > Martin, > > On Sun, 2016-02-21 at 04:29 -0700, Brynn wrote: >> Hi Friends (website team), >> I'm reporting images here, until the report system allows for >> the >> reporter to add comments. (Maybe I should make a feature request for >> that?) >> https://inkscape.org/en/~UptownKas/%E2%98%85kas >> The member may well have created the logo in Inkscape, but >> it's a >> photo of (probably) his kids (or her kids?). It could be perfectly >> innocent >> misunderstanding. But could also just be advertising....although >> they >> didn't make any outside links. Should they be contacted? >> Remind me how much space a regular member gets?

On Sun, 2016-02-21 at 14:09 -0700, Brynn wrote: > Oh no, I didn't see anything malicious either. But isn't this supposed > to > be a gallery for Inkscape images? > > If any image is ok, as long as it's not malicious or advertising or > nudity, > won't the gallery eventually lose its focus (along with its audience)? > (That cardboard castle image still annoys me. It's less about Inkscape > than > this one! If this one actually has any connection.) > > Perhaps I'm missing something about this? But especially with space > apparently coming at a premium (BG 4 times in the last hour), won't the > gallery and website be better off without random non-Inkscape images? We have no official policy on non-inkscape images. Part of the reason for having such a low quota (when it works) is to not have to mind so much about random images that aren't actually offensive. It's an attempt to reduce our workloads if you will. Martin,