I see where you are coming from, but I wouldn’t worry to much about people seeing the content twice. On the contrary, that should convince them that Lemmy has as much content as Reddit!
it shouldn’t become a recycling grounds with little QA.
Well, I do the QA, as most of the content on Reddit isn’t that interesting, so there’s that.
About credit for OCs, I don’t think I’ve posted any OC that wasn’t credited, usually I have a look at the post and see if the creator has a link of any kind that can be credited.
On the contrary, that should convince them that Lemmy has as much content as Reddit!
I don’t think the math checks out on that.
While quantity of content is essential for a community like this, many Reddit refugees, myself included, turned to Lemmy due to Reddit’s changes which empower repost bots that regurgitate content in high quantities but the quality of the content is diminished by it being reposted content that the audience has probably already (even more so diminished if it is uncredited).
Your Lemmy posts with an i.redd.it link or a preview.redd.it link don’t directly link to a page that identifies the OP. While there is a button on the page that should connect to the original post, this button instead takes users to the App Store (or equivalent) to install the Reddit app, even if the Reddit app is already on the device. I’m also just now seeing that the Memmy app for Lemmy does not show when a post is hosted via an i.redd.it link and it instead presents the post content as if it were hosted native to Lemmy, so that is an oversight on my behalf and I see now that I had mistaken some of your posts as being uncredited copies.
Other users are apparently under the impression that content is OC if it is presented this way without a direct identification of the source. This commenter thought you had made the content in the post, and you could have clarified in a reply and said that somebody else made it. Alternatively, being as clear as possible in the title of a post about who made what is the most direct way to avoid that confusion.
Other users are apparently under the impression that content is OC if it is presented this way without a direct identification of the source. This commenter thought you had made the content in the post, and you could have clarified in a reply and said that somebody else made it. Alternatively, being as clear as possible in the title of a post about who made what is the most direct way to avoid that confusion.
Is there a patent for techniques for Lego? As you said, the Reddit links show the original post, in which the OP actually didn’t even comment on anything, so there isn’t even any proof that this content is theirs. The post is not even tagged as “OC” on Reddit. I didn’t label the post as “OC” on Lemmy either, so I don’t know where the confusion could come from.
What’s the relevance of who discovered the technique? Surely the parts were designed with that geometry in mind. The commenter is asking about the choice of representing the technique by way of bricks made out of bricks.
My attempts at reverse image searches only showed the original Reddit post and your Lemmy post as the only matching results. A good rule of thumb for citations is still noting where you got info from even if you cannot find or identify the primary source.
My point is that even with that indirect link that obscures who the OP is, the audience of the Lemmy post may be prone to assuming that the first person they see posting the content is also the creator of the content unless they see directly stated otherwise.
I see where you are coming from, but I wouldn’t worry to much about people seeing the content twice. On the contrary, that should convince them that Lemmy has as much content as Reddit!
Well, I do the QA, as most of the content on Reddit isn’t that interesting, so there’s that.
About credit for OCs, I don’t think I’ve posted any OC that wasn’t credited, usually I have a look at the post and see if the creator has a link of any kind that can be credited.
I don’t think the math checks out on that.
While quantity of content is essential for a community like this, many Reddit refugees, myself included, turned to Lemmy due to Reddit’s changes which empower repost bots that regurgitate content in high quantities but the quality of the content is diminished by it being reposted content that the audience has probably already (even more so diminished if it is uncredited).
Your Lemmy posts with an i.redd.it link or a preview.redd.it link don’t directly link to a page that identifies the OP. While there is a button on the page that should connect to the original post, this button instead takes users to the App Store (or equivalent) to install the Reddit app, even if the Reddit app is already on the device. I’m also just now seeing that the Memmy app for Lemmy does not show when a post is hosted via an i.redd.it link and it instead presents the post content as if it were hosted native to Lemmy, so that is an oversight on my behalf and I see now that I had mistaken some of your posts as being uncredited copies.
Other users are apparently under the impression that content is OC if it is presented this way without a direct identification of the source. This commenter thought you had made the content in the post, and you could have clarified in a reply and said that somebody else made it. Alternatively, being as clear as possible in the title of a post about who made what is the most direct way to avoid that confusion.
I just went across that post again, and it seems that this technique has been discovered as long as 14 years ago: https://www.flickr.com/photos/nabii/5276801305/in/dateposted-public/
Is there a patent for techniques for Lego? As you said, the Reddit links show the original post, in which the OP actually didn’t even comment on anything, so there isn’t even any proof that this content is theirs. The post is not even tagged as “OC” on Reddit. I didn’t label the post as “OC” on Lemmy either, so I don’t know where the confusion could come from.
What’s the relevance of who discovered the technique? Surely the parts were designed with that geometry in mind. The commenter is asking about the choice of representing the technique by way of bricks made out of bricks.
My attempts at reverse image searches only showed the original Reddit post and your Lemmy post as the only matching results. A good rule of thumb for citations is still noting where you got info from even if you cannot find or identify the primary source.
My point is that even with that indirect link that obscures who the OP is, the audience of the Lemmy post may be prone to assuming that the first person they see posting the content is also the creator of the content unless they see directly stated otherwise.