AI and background images

For clarity, because I feel like that was directed at me, I want to say that posting from both Anthonie and Archer is only because I am too lazy to switch accounts just to post in this thread. I am not trying to take advantage of the fact I have a professor account or try to "create volume" and I feel it is unfair that you jumped to this conclusion. I will change all my posters to Archer; I do not believe it is necessary to use such lowly methods to convey my points or stimulate attention.

Never said it was on purpose, honestly don't care if it is on purpose because the point was we have hundreds of users and have heard the voices of a few dozen at most.

With respect, I would appreciate seeing examples of users that support AI being actively targeted by those that have voiced their opposition.

I also would like to point out that Zach’s autonomy is a valuable thing to prioritize, but that, in the end, the edits are catering towards a greater community that has a right to participate in active discussion that impacts the site as a whole. I’d just like some clarity.

Well, Clark left the site because after he mentioned the fact that he and another user wanted to shut down this thread, they (as well as the other user) were blocked by a user. They have been since unblocked they believe and perhaps it was simply coincidental. Nothing has been or will be done regarding the matter because people have the right to set boundaries such as not wanting to talk to someone for any reason but that does not make it not feel retaliatory.

I can point to specific statements in this thread that have made me personally feel uncomfortable. I can do the same for Zach. I've also seen copies of the messages Zach received when this discussion first began.

The challenge is that, technically, none of these messages are overt personal attacks. People are expressing their opinions, and they're entitled to do that. No one is saying, "Listen here, you [insult/cuss]..." Instead, they're telling us that the site is being ruined, that we're harming the environment, that we're hurting artists, or implying that we're making an unethical choice. Those are opinions, but they're also judgments about the decisions we've made and, by extension, about us.

When that becomes the dominant tone of the conversation, it creates an environment where simply saying, "I think this is an acceptable solution," feels uncomfortable. It becomes difficult to express a differing opinion without expecting to be met with another moral argument about why you're wrong or irresponsible.

That's ultimately the point I'm trying to make. This isn't about whether people should be allowed to disagree, they absolutely should. It's about whether the atmosphere surrounding the discussion has become one where people with a different viewpoint feel comfortable participating. From my perspective, because I too get to have an opinion, is that this is not a place where people would or should feel comfortable expressing that perspective.

Again, this is not a shut down. Opinions welcome, but an opinion is going to carry weight and impact people. I'm not punishing opinions, but I am going to say that certain expressions have been hurtful. Heck, my opinion is going to have an impact.

Instead, they're telling us that the site is being ruined, that we're harming the environment, that we're hurting artists, or implying that we're making an unethical choice. Those are opinions [...].

While the first point might be more personal to some people, the use of gen ai is objectively harming the environment through water use, taking away jobs from artists, and unethical to the underpaid workers. These are not opinions; these are facts.

"The site would look better with an image that looks like so and so..." This, on the other hand, is an opinion.

For sake of site etiquette, please refrain from double posting.

Have a good night folks.

You too. Sleep well.

Lear, I would like to point out that people who are speaking up against the use of AI have provided solutions that are more than a toggle button and plain backgrounds. It would be amazing, if everyone was not so dismissive about whatever we have to say, our solutions to the said problem should at least be tried out.
Also, can we not water down what bullying is? Blocking someone is not bullying.
If Clark left because his argument was not being heard, despite actively being backed by the admins, Harlan did the same.
To be honest, this feels as if you already have made the decision of having AI backgrounds.

I think there may perhaps be a misconception about some of the accusations listed above. Without speaking for the group, it was my understanding that individuals were not claiming that this site in specific was harming the environment, harming artists, etc., but rather stating that AI as a whole has done that, and so direct affiliation with AI (as in being contained in every single one of our forums) is indirect affiliation and support of those impacts.

It’s not an accusation so much as it is an observation. The site as a whole is greater than each individual character account. What is contained in the site is a reflection of its morals. This is my understanding of the issue.

The options given, such as having a plain background have already been taken. We developed the toggle also based on a suggestion. I have made the statement that if we had AI that we would work on changing them over with artist-made products. We have taken the suggestions, we have not been dismissive.