Thanks for your comments, C R.

I probably won't change much, if anything, about the way I handle these images. Not without a larger outcry from the community. But when you see one of these images, imagine that I'm shaking my fist and muttering under my breath (like Snoopy !#@&%!$*!!)

If we started removing the "could have been" it would start approaching the point where some automated process would be helpful. But for now, there's no burden.

Thanks again, brynn

-----Original Message----- From: C R Sent: Sunday, October 22, 2017 2:58 PM To: brynn Cc: Inkscape-Docs ; Inkscape-Devel Subject: Re: [Inkscape-devel] moderation - 'could have been made w/Inkscape'

Maybe Martin could add a flagging system ti the galleries. Something that automatically sends a notification to the poster about a suspicious post. They then have x days to respond. If they don't the post is auto-deleted.

This may save you some time, and will let the poster plead their case as it were without you having to follow up on it.

Just a thought. -C

On Sun, Oct 22, 2017 at 9:56 PM, C R <cajhne@...2...> wrote:

Hey Brynn. I'd say if it gets to the point where it's diluting the awesome, maybe do it in bulk. :) Until then, I think we all trust your judgement, and appreciate your help with it. Please do whatever you think is best.

I agree with all your points. :)

Re: 100% inkscape... I'm not sure what that means :) I use Inkscape in Tandem with GIMP all the time, back and forth for example. I doubt very much if people use Inkscape and illustrator together, but who knows. Again, I trust your judgement on it. As long as Inkscape is being used as a graphics tool, I think we should allow posting. If someone is blatantly abusing our galleries to advertise their non-Inkscape art, then it's probably a good enough reason to delete them.

Not sure if the above is all that helpful, but thanks for your thoughts and help with all of it.

-C

On Sun, Oct 22, 2017 at 7:09 PM, brynn <brynn@...78...> wrote:

...

Thanks for your comments, C R.

...

Re: Time as a resource: I think it's not worth anyone's time to scour

the internet trying to prove that something wasn't made in Inkscape.

Well of course, that's not what I'm proposing. For the image I did search, there was no scouring. It was the first result of the first search I made. It was clear enough for me just to look at the image. But I searched it out just to prove my suspicion. (It's the only time I've done that.)

For the rest of your comments, I had the very same thoughts at first. If it could have been....why not. But the reason I wanted to try to discuss, is because

(a) These images are numerous, considering our limited space.

(b) Most of them could really only be done by advanced users (That's usually how I catch them. If they really had been made with Inkscape, in my experience, the artist wants to shout it out - not make a drive-by upload.)

(c) I'm afraid it's misrepresenting Inkscape's abilities. I'm afraid it gives the impression that it must be easy to create amazing images.

(d) It makes it harder to find the really awesome Inkscape-made images. It kind of dilutes the pool of awesome.

I really have always (well, since I found Inkscape 10 years ago) wanted an Inkscape-only gallery. To me, THAT would be amazing! And to me, that's what the website should provide.

I wonder if it would work to have another category, or another Order By option, like All Inkscape or 100% Inkscape, or something like that? Because I certainly have no objection to having images in the gallery, for which Inkscape was used only for part of it. But maybe it would be nice to have the "all Inkscape" images easier to find?

Well anyway, as I said, I already had an idea that this isn't a big concern for the community. But I just wanted to voice a few thoughts as to why maybe it should be.

Thanks again :-) brynn

-----Original Message----- From: C R Sent: Monday, October 16, 2017 4:33 AM To: brynn Cc: Inkscape-Docs ; Inkscape-Devel Subject: Re: [Inkscape-devel] moderation - 'could have been made w/Inkscape'

Re: Time as a resource: I think it's not worth anyone's time to scour the internet trying to prove that something wasn't made in Inkscape.

I can think of several ways to do the graphic in question (or at least similar) in Inkscape, so I'd let it stay as it's actually quite stunning and not really hurting anyone.

Even if it's not done in Inkscape, it gets people thinking about how it could be done in Inkscape, which is not a bad thing. Maybe it will inspire someone to post a vector resource of it in the future.

Going forward, this is my recommendation: If it looks like it could have been done in Inkscape, and it was posted on our website, then we can assume (for the sake of aesthetics) that it was.

Obviously if the uploader came back and replied to your comment, saying "Oh, I've not done this in Inkscape." Then you can remove it without having to make any guesses. :)

Thanks for bringing it to attention, Brynn. Your hard work to fight against random non-Inkscape posts is definitely making the site much more usable and clutter free for everyone.

-C

On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 5:29 AM, brynn <brynn@...78...> wrote:

...

Hi Friends, I think I probably know how the community leans on this. But since it bothers me so much, and happens so often, I thought it was worth not assuming the answer, and finding out for sure.

   A few months ago, we decided not to allow random photos in the

gallery, which are unrelated to the project in any way. We also decided not to bother with copyright issues. (long discussion - https://sourceforge.net/p/inkscape/mailman/message/35798617/)

   Probably equally as often as random photos being uploaded, are

images which *could have been made with Inkscape* but which I doubt were. So far, I've been letting these go through. But as I said, I wanted to have a discussion, rather than assume.

   Here are a couple of recent examples:

-- 2 images, 1 resource and 1 thumbnail -- https://inkscape.org/en/~noahgabe@...172.../%E2%98%85music

-- https://inkscape.org/en/~KristiBryant113/%E2%98%85jesus-saves-the-world2 (I did a little research on this one, and found it at many different sites (many on different sites selling tshirts, as well as just web images) with the same basic image (and this exact image here:

https://res.cloudinary.com/teepublic/image/private/s--rVeDm8Gt--/t_Preview/b...) -- so I'm pretty sure it wasn't made with Inkscape)

--https://inkscape.org/en/~chiquitita/%E2%98%8515230751-703016283207581-847538...

   To me, all of those /could have been/ made with Inkscape.  But I

have reasons to doubt all of them. How do you all think they should be handled? I think they should be handled similarly to random photos (contact the member, explain and link to CoC, ask to explain the relation to Inkscape, ask if they would like to remove, inform after 2 weeks we will do it, of course with graciousness. Or do we let them have the benefit of our doubt?

   I honestly don't understand why people go around posting random

images (apparently, afaict) in random galleries, once or twice, and never come back. (I have the same curiosity about people who post 1 or 2 frivolous, sometimes meaningless messages in forums and never return.) But it seems worth the effort not to waste our limited resource on hosting these things.

   Anyway, thanks for any thoughts or comments :-)

All best, brynn

---

Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot _______________________________________________ Inkscape-devel mailing list Inkscape-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel