>>7108
>I read through rules and there's nothing against it.
I almost wanted to say you're wrong after looking at the image, but double checking the rules, I think the OP image's top statement is just borderline. It can be used as the absolute limit of the rules so long as a thread like this doesn't become a problem
like loli self-hypno threads have in the past . Regardless, third party caption edits are cringey and gay. Get some better taste.
>>7109
Firstly, this image is further cropped from the original for no reason. Here's the original
but still edited image. Secondly, urls are case sensitive, but some retard has made it all caps. Thirdly, I tried all permutations of lower and upper case links to try and verify whether it was something that needs to be deleted, and it seems that link either the link is dead, or I failed to enter it correctly. Catbox doesn't ban most things, and files on it are permanent, so I can only assume it was illegal material if it's now 404ing. I'm deleting it for being suspicious linking in case I made some typo and it's linking something illegal. Fourthly, the graph itself is bullshit. Nothing in the cited study can be used to derive that graph, and the graph itself was copied over from another study, then edited to have the ages shifted over. In summary, your image shit, pedoshit, fake, and gay, and I'm strongly considering banning third party caption autism on both the basis of attracting real pedoshit and just general overall low quality in accordance with rule 7, given how this thread is off to a
wonderful start.