https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Comm ... Dronebogus
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Comm ... ominationsUndeletion. There was a consensus to keep. Yann is clearly super-voting on his own hatred of “AI erotic images” against consensus and should be de-mopped. Dronebogus (talk) 14:31, 5 January 2023 (UTC)
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Comm ... _bluenoser
This is hilariously hypocritical: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Comm ... k:Oddman47
You don't say. It's a good thing Dronebogus doesn't do that.User has been abusing commons as a webhost/blog/porn site for over a decade and getting away with it largely because of the passable quality of his uploads and a handful of genuinely educational images. We don’t have a “not here” policy but this user is definitely not here to build an educational collection. Dronebogus (talk) 06:08, 21 April 2023 (UTC)
Here's him being a pedo again: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Comm ... violations
Okay, how is the picture of a teenage geisha “objectifying”? At all? Dronebogus (talk) 00:16, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
Agree, baselessly accusing people of creating or uploading child sexual abuse material should be an actionable offense. Dronebogus (talk) 03:31, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
How is “this user makes child porn” not a civility violation? Dronebogus (talk) 07:21, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
Please, just accept there’s a point at which you mitigate losses and fold ‘em. I think Commons should be less tolerant of casually chucking extremely inflammatory accusations like “child porn” at other editors but that’s a question for another thread. Dronebogus (talk) 11:11, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
DB, didn't you recently have to clarify that in the nude pictures of Wikipetan that you drew and uploaded, she was an adult? I mean you got some guts defending the AI smut in this discussion. Yes, of course Ben should be TBANed from uploading AI-generated images. He used the AI to create smut and then uploaded it here and then tried to add them to Wikipedia under the guise of demonstrating AI. It's a more sophisticated method, but basically the same thing as drawing a nude picture of Wikipetan and uploading it. You guys are too much. Happy New Year! Levivich (talk) 15:26, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
Charming passive- aggression. You are now muted. Happy new year. Dronebogus (talk) 15:29, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
I don’t know what point you’re trying to make here. If it’s to humiliate me, the only purpose I can possibly see, it isn’t working. Dronebogus (talk) 15:35, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
But while we’re playing the below-the-belt ad hominem game, wowee what’s this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Diff/1126914409 Dronebogus (talk) 15:41, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Comm ... DronebogusIf I’m not mistaken our friend here is playing the “ew hentai” card. Or possibly the “cough pedo” card. Dronebogus (talk) 15:49, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
Did you link the wrong diff? Anyway, my point is that it was wrong for Ben to use an AI to create sexualized images and upload them to Commons, just as it was wrong for you to draw a nude Wikipetan (and others) and upload them to Commons. I'm surprised to see you of all people defending this so ardently, it seems you haven't learned from your recent experience. Eww is right. Levivich (talk) 15:51, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
That isn’t remotely an argument. Dronebogus (talk) 15:54, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
“It’s wrong because ew”? That’s the hill you’re gonna die on? No worse than naked wikipetan or “busty young girl” in your defense. Dronebogus (talk) 15:55, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
You are resorting to cheap point-and-laugh humiliation tactics in place of an argument. It’s just as pathetic as the behavior you’re attacking. Dronebogus (talk) 15:58, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
Defending Fascists again.It’s a question of reliable sourcing. Franco and Pinochet are not described as “totalitarian” in any sources provided so far Dronebogus (talk) 15:17, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Comm ... ourse.webm
Interesting how he always happens to find errors in sexual files specifically. Totally not a pattern. I'm sure he uses Commons for its intended purpose as he tells others to do.
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Comm ... oblem_user
It isn't good enough for his tastes.
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Comm ... reepy_user
I wonder why he was looking through files of underage women to begin with. I'm sure he was there to just report abuse like a Wikipedian.
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Comm ... 98#CP_user
The only file the user ever uploaded was CP. There's statically very low probably that Dronebogus found it by accident.
