I disagree. It's not specific but it is one way of being Humble. Pointing out the limits of their contributions. It is much better than keeping the money as a business owner. (Keeping the credit to yourself)

[–] [email protected] 22 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Except they don't say who the author is. If you want to help the author spread their work, saying who it is would help people find their work. Providing a link to the original would be the next step beyond. So it is like keeping the money as a business owner, but saying that it's all thanks to your wonderful employees. Or throwing them a pizza party for the record breaking profits they made that year.

You see this a lot with reposted art. A repost on a Twitter account that does nothing but repost art? 10k likes, no mention of who the original artist is. The original piece on the artist's Twitter account? 127 likes.

[–] Eddyzh 6 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

I agree that it's bad. .just not that it is worse than nothing.

[–] mlg 16 points 6 months ago

random reposted meme on YouTube that I'm too lazy to search the actual poster for because it's like 7 years old but the reposter is one of those dumb "fresh dank meme" channels trying to gg ez with community post spam

[–] benignintervention 8 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

Hbomberguy moment

[–] TotallynotJessica 1 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

No credit to the author. They're an asshole who produces literary shit. Not crediting them is the nicer thing to do.

Edit: I mean in some cases, not for this meme. If the work is bigoted I'm being nice by not crediting them.