Edit: I misread the posted image, OP is suggesting rules to filter new accounts, not with a new account themselves.
Nothing said why he got banned, but he got banned with a brand new account. The new account isn’t the ban reason itself, but it’s the reason the mods would be on a hair trigger for just the whiff of a problem.
Edit: I misread the posted image, OP is suggesting rules to filter new accounts, not with a new account themselves.
A brand new account getting banned tells us almost nothing about whether the ban was warranted. Brand new accounts talking about automod are either evading a ban or have history on their main account they don’t want the mods to see. These might be horrible power-abusing mods, but even if there wasn’t a larger history not seen here, banning a brand new account just because the vibes seem off is a-ok in my book.
A license that requires source. And since then there have been many different licenses, all with the same requirement. Giving someone a binary for free and saying they’re allowed to edit the hex codes and redistribute it doesn’t mean it’s open source. A license to use and modify is necessary but not sufficient for something to be open source. You need to provide the source.
“Open source” is not a license, it’s a description. Things can be free with no license restrictions and still not be “open source”.
A freely available and unencumbered binary (e.g., the model weights) isn’t the same thing as open-source. The source is the data. You can’t rebuild the model without the data, nor can you verify that it wasn’t intentionally biased or crippled.
Ah, I misread the quoted image. I will edit my earlier replies to let people know my assumption was incorrect.