notabot

Rather than snark, maybe offer some helpful pointers, or even ask if there’s a reason for it?

I see your point, they just switch the rolls.

Where do you think the expression “cocked up” comes from? It’s what happens if you tip over when doing cock pushups. Remember to always stay safe in the cocknasium.

What kind of prehensile pps are y’all having??

Just the normal kind.

Are dicks supposed to have 6-packs?

You need to put in the work to get the best result.

Or is there a secret fellatio technique that includes pelvis-deep sucking?

You really have been missing out…

Difficult to cut off, maybe, but not so difficult to crush.

Jeeniouus!

That sounds like a tough journey, but Moop looks very content indeed to be sharing it with you.

I’m sure that’s a reference to something, but I’m at a Loss to figure out what.

Funny, but actually worse. Could you please take that down, or if you really insist on misattributing it, use your own username?

Because it is wildly disrespectful to the original artist, coming close to you tacitly trying to claim credit for creating it, and makes it harder for people to find the original source, especially if someone quotes, crossposts, forwards or otherwise repeats your post.

It’s thoroughly obnoxious behaviour, you’ve been told that repeatedly, by many people. Just stop doing it.

You have, once again, removed the artist’s name from the image. Note that in the OP’s version ‘LINSEDITION.COM’ is displayed in the bottom right, but you’ve cropped it off. Stop doing that.

Stop removing the artist’s tagline.

Rather than “AI”, that looks quite a bit like something that’s been badly scanned, run through a basic OCR to create text, which has then been laid out by someone who doesn’t write the language well enough to kniw it’s gibberish.

The line “1 tablespoon (om Jto paste” for instance, was almost certainly “1 tablespoon tomato paste”. You can see the similarity oin the character shapes between the gibberish and real text.

ETA: It’s still mildly infuriating that soneone would waste the paper printing this nonsense though.

Yeah, I know, I’ve seen their posts before. I hoped that asking would both bring it to the attention of people who hadn’t noticed, and give him a chance to explain himself should he wish to try.

Why did you choose to remove the original author’s name from this?

This has got to be peak irony.

The watermark is part of the work, removing it removes the way for a viewer to find the creator, especially if it’s shared on from here. Putting it in a comment is helpful, as it’s clickable, but it doesn’t mean you can choose to remove it from the image.

Xorg 4 lyfe!

Good news: you can read a chart correctly!

Bad news: It seems that there are approximately 120 civilian owned firearms per 100 persons in the USA: 2017 survey. See particularly the “Estimating Global Civilian-held Firearms Numbers” briefing paper and its annex. That seems to be the survey that most reports are based on. I don’t imagine the number has dropped over the interveneing years.