Generally editing other users images is implicitly allowed, unless image author has not clearly prohibited that; in our big recurring threads (C&C and others) this is likely explicitly stated in thread start posts too - at least I have seen such statements somewhere.
There have been few threads were editing other users images was discussed. I would say about third or fourth of our users do not like that, other people have nothing against it.
What about particular member - he just misuses that option :(
I am not aware of the situation you are describing, as It is probably in a thread I do not follow. But I will take it as an excuse to talk about CC.
Commenting on other peoples pictures, is a delicate thing. In photo forums it is not always done tactfully and at worst, is done to stroke the critics, self ego. We have all seen the bullying self appointed expert in photo forums.
If somebody has posted a picture, it is presumed they were happy with it and wished to share it. It is good manners to be tactful, pointing out things that are not quite right, using words like "maybe" or "perhaps", when suggesting improvements. Even those of us with a lot of photography under our belt, make mistakes and miss things. In another couple of threads, I was pleased to get a couple of comments pointing out things I missed in a shot. We all make mistakes, and miss that sloping horizon at times.
Even if I had the time to spare, I would not personally ever consider post processing a picture sombody else posted, unless of course they asked. Much better to suggest improvements and let the owner of the picture experiment and discover for his/her self, how to improve the picture. But we all have different tastes in how a picture should look.
Maybe we all worry too much about how our photographs look. Most non photographers will never see, or worry about stuff we consider to be flaws.
Because online image theft cannot be prevented I only post my images online that I don't care what people do with - download them, edit them, repost them, sell them, whatever.
I've not seen that behavior on this site. Generally there is only one weekly thread where it is explicitly understood that you invite that level of C&C unless you clearly state otherwise. I've not seen this abused by anybody.
Personally I don't understand the concept that you can produce thousands of copies of a single image and demand that not one person tears one in half or draws a comedy glasses and mustache over it (even a copy of the Mona Lisa has had that done), just in the same way i don't think a musician can demand silence, you command it. If the image has value it will stand on it's own, or if you throw it into the internet it might actually come out better, certainly the journey may prove interesting and has zero impact on your original photo and ideas safe and sound on your own HD.
As far as the "rudely" part, this is a semi-anonymous internet forum, typed words without intonation or facial expression. You have to allow a flexibility in intent when reading rather than jump to assumptions.
See beyond your own opinion, if you get my drift... 😉😉
You still have not posted any proof showing your statement is true.
Making accusations like you have without posting any proof members are editing other people's images without permission is in effect suggesting to me you believe that I or anyone else can go ahead and post any sort of baseless accusation against you, NCV or anyone else here or wherever else they like.
I haven't seen any post where any member has stated their version of an image is better than the image creator's.
Personally, I always comment about how an image looks on my particular screen because as I have posted numerous times, how an image renders on a viewer's screen depends on if a screen is calibrated and to what brightness it is calibrated to and if it is then subsequently profiled correctly.
Since you are making statements without any proof to support them then I wonder if your motive behind this thread is to troll.