What is this warning?

Just a question concerning https://lainchan.org/vis/res/5259.html#q9271 Normally the warnings you give people are "you should always elaborate on your opinions", but why this? Any ideas why this post is at risk of deletion or something odd happened?

>>12757 This post is at risk of deletion because of Do not post child pornography or questionable 2D/3DCG/3DPG sexual depictions of children. This includes "child models". If you must post it, spoiler any NSFW content and make sure it's relevant to the discussion. However in this case, because the figurine is clearly a figurine in an art thread, instead of being deleted , the file has been spoilered and the poster and other posters warned. As the warning says, if you in this thread or others repost the image, then the post and image will be deleted due to Rule 8 violation.

This is weird, concerning the fact that I only posted screencap of said warning. Clearly, this is the strangest case of a Rule 8 breach. How come reposting the image attached in this link could cause a deletion of a post when basically I found the warning's just feels... out of place to be on a glitch art thread?

>>12759 Because of a thing called precedent. Historically other posters have used other benefit of the doubt warnings to argue that their own rule violations should also be given the benefit of the doubt and have started flooding boards with spam and then complaining on /q/ threads about it. This isn't the strangest case of a Rule 8 breach, this is just first one you have seen with a benefit of the doubt warning, communicating staff intent. In the past pictures and posts like this have just been deleted without communication of intent or marked as bod by staff and not warned, once again with no staff communication. Reposting any image enough times (using pixel manipulated variants to not trigger same image functionality) can result in post deletion due to Rule 7 violation. If this wasn't a figurine in that picture, and instead an actual model or Renaissance painting or photo in that thread, it would have just been deleted without communication. Even the poster broke Rule 6 saying that they new mods would probably delete it, so I don't think the mod reply in the warning to the poster and to other posters that might have their own glitch with questionable source material is out of place.

>>12762 Well, still one of the weirdest things out there, communicating staff doubts over just that. Thanks!