I post to art at least once a week and have never had issues posting. I posted something last night and it was autoremoved (I messaged the mods but didn't hear back) and the automod told me it must be the title and to check it/fix it and I can repost, so I did exactly that when I did not hear back from the mods and my post went through. I first wrote to the mods: >Could I please get my post here approved https://www.reddit.com/r/Art/comments/nmkg7z/avatar_practice_duang_digital_2018/gzp35qt/?context=3 I'm not sure why it was removed exactly. Then like I said, I posted the pic after fixing* the title, as per recommendation of automod. https://np.reddit.com/r/Art/comments/nmku71/avatar_duang_digital_2018/ I checked back today and there were comments in the thread saying I plagiarized the work* and pretended it was mine, which I did NOT do and have NEVER done before. I commented to set the record straight and then I noticed I had received a message from the mod of that sub: >Not this time. Next time, if you copy a photo, you must include a link to the source to give credit to the original artist. Otherwise, it's plagiarism. I wrote back: >I don't understand, I have posted art here before and I specifically never post the artstation w/e source as it does not say that it is required in the sidebar (at least of the old reddit - which I use) and I don't want the posts removed as solicitation as I am not trying to do that so I never include the source in the thread as I do in other subs that I post art to, which usually require you to put the source. How is it plagiarism? I put the name of the original artist... https://www.artstation.com/artwork/ZN89G Unless this person on artstation is not the actual artist in which case that would be news to me. I am not and have never claimed ownership of any of the art I post. >I put the name of the artist in the title** They wrote (not realizing that I had reposted it long before I had heard back from them the first time): >Plagiarism is something you already should know not to do. We shouldn't have to remind you. If your drawing is not significantly different from some other source, you should feel obligated to give credit to the artist who first created it, so yours can be properly evaluated. >Many artists make copies they claim are original, and we can't remove or even track them all. We just crack down on the ones we see. >As I said, for future reference, in your next post include a source and (at least for now) it's all good. Then: >Or you can post it again, ignoring my warning, and earn a temp ban. Which is actually fairly generous. We usually ban permanently, but I can tell you're still probably confused by what I mean. >Even if the art is by someone else, if it's a copy of a photo, you must credit the source and (if possible) the photographer by name. I know this is a copy because another work by the same artist was shown to be a digital copy of the same model. Yours is just a different photo, but same technique. >If the artist is telling people their work is 100% original, that's on them. Lots of people steal art, and sometimes it works out for them until they're found out and exposed. This artist certainly has some skill with digital brushes, but copying should just be an exercise. They're nothing until they can make original work. Lots of other digital artists do. >Yes, that means you might have to do some research before posting. Or maybe just post artists whose work you admire and who don't take credit for something they didn't conceive. I wrote in response: >What are you talking about? I posted it again, as per recommendation from the automod BEFORE I heard back from you and my post went through and THEN I heard from you and I explained that I have NOT plagerized anyone, I credited the artist as I always have done here and I DID NOT KNOW I needed to source the work or else I do have done so here and each time before. It does not say that I need to source it in the sidebar, at least of old Reddit. This is all a big misunderstanding and I can't believe I am banned, let alone having my post here removed. This is ridiculous. >I gave you a source and explained myself. Please I would like if it you would re-approve my post and unban me and I will from here on out always provide a source in the comment section now that I know I need to. They wrote to me: >>This is ridiculous. >Y'know, if it was your own art, I might cut you some slack. But it's clear you're just wasting our time. So let's make the ban permanent and be done with it. Then I was muted and permanently banned. And I found this out after trying to reply with this: >I didn't take credit for this art or any art I've posted here or to other subs. I frequently source the stuff I post and I only didn't do that here as I didn't know it was required. That is all. I am being candid here. I DID do research because I posted, I found the art on artstation and I uploaded a imgur link because I thought I wasn't allowed to link to artstation. There is no deception from my end, like I said this is a big misunderstanding and I am unjustly being censored and banned, this is preposterous. To my knowledge, that sub accepts non OC, and as I've said, I have posted there before, probably a dozen times (13 other times to be exact) and I have never ONCE claimed any of this art to be mine, nor have I posted the source in the comment section out of fear of being accused of solicitation. I was not even aware that a source was required and would always post to imgur (to abide by rule 2) even though I frequently post art to other subs and link directly to the artists page and or provide a source in the comment section, but I would at least include the artists name. Update: It turns out this digital art piece had been posted yesterday under a different name: https://np.reddit.com/r/Art/comments/nlkkr0/lust_irakli_nadar_digital_2021 And the same mod who banned me, wrote there: >Mod here. If the art copies someone else's work, you must provide the source so we know it's not 100% original content. It doesn't matter if the art isn't yours. Give credit where it is due. >Temp ban this time. Next time do better. So they know I didn't plagerize, that I gave credit to the artist (I gave them the link to the artstation page) and they still removed my post and temp banned me for plagerization (?) (apparently the artist did a digital painting of a pic Ona Morgan) and then perma banned me when I disputed why I was temp banned and had my post removed. See my numerous experiences with bans on Reddit I've posted about here? That is not even half of the bans I've received, just the more recent ones. I don't know what is going on, but it isn't good. Mod abuse is a real. This is what I get for trying to contribute to subs and then politely inquiring about unreasonable post removals/bans/censorship.