>>1619488>Last thread and most of this one was fine until certain people showed up.This obviously happens due to new people, but there will always be new people and there should be. Keeping new people away will keep up standards for a short time, but it dries up creativity and the amount of content posted, because even good posters leave after a while, no matter the situation.
By getting fed up and angry at everyone, despite such occurances probably happening due to vocal minorities because I bet that most of the thread lurks, you are worsening the situation. People would see that some don't care, they sadly infer that all don't care and then they stop caring themselves.
The answer to low quality posts are not more low quality posts, but high quality posts to raise the standard and show people that there still are others that care, too. Moot agrees, don't bother him about it.
If you insist on not providing, for example, links or passwords, there is always the even better option of helping people by actually giving them a way to learn how to access new content on their. Teach them what to look out for. They should be taught how to fish for content (hurrdurr, give a man a fish, [...]).
That being said, have a link to [image related].
>>1619394I greatly appreciated it. There's always the problem with not knowing who created something, though, but you know how the saying goes: "Imitation is the greatest praise." (Note that I don't think that watermarks are a solution.)
