So, I've stated plenty of reasons for allowing a creator credit to be put on the cover. It would only help to increase the covers available, no one is forced to do it, you can remove the credit before printing, etc., etc.
The only reasons not to allow it seem to be summed up in "I don't like it." - which, of course, is solved by just choosing not to print that cover, right?
Under both sets of rules (credit allowed vs. not allowed), someone who's anti-credit has the same outcome - they're going to miss out on covers either way - either because they don't want to print them or the creators don't make them available. However, someone who's pro-credit or don't-give-a-poop-credit is hurt by the not allowed stance but helped by the allowed stance.
Basically, we have two possible outcomes (credits vs. no credits) and two groups of people (for and against).
Those against are going to miss out either way - so, ultimately, it doesn't hurt/harm them, no matter what they decide. But those who are for (or don't care) - we're the ones who miss out.
OF COURSE, this doesn't mean anyone is going to be FORCED to put credits on their covers. And this doesn't mean that we can't continue to discourage artists from putting a credit on their work (though I'm a little concerned about the practice of simply removing it before posting the cover... are you getting an okay from the creator of that cover before doing that? otherwise, ouch...). All this means is that if someone *does* want to include a credit and *does* want to make their work available to the community, then we're not making them choose between what they feel is their right vs. providing the community with a service.
Sheep - you're okay with someone making a profit off someone else's work? But you're against the idea of someone getting a small, single line of text crediting them for the work they did? I just don't understand that...
