Posted under General
Toks said:
Several times already Albert has tried changing things related to upload limit so people with many deleted posts are more heavily penalized. But it gets reverted within days every time because many people complain it's unfair. Not only the large number of affected people, some senior staff members also agreed it was unfair.
If you have a specific algorithm in mind which is more fair than the previous ones then you could suggest it.
I'm not sure where the unfairness comes in. As it stands, it's easy to get to the "I couldn't possibly find enough things to upload to fill my cap in three days, anyway," point. Either raising the number of approvals it takes to increment the cap upwards, or lowering the number of deletions it takes to decrement the cap would both punish deletions more heavily. Lowering the number of deletions, in particular, would be most specifically pointed at people getting many things deleted. Since you still "tread water" with 10% deletions in even something like a 18 approvals to get a cap bump, 2 deletions to decrement cap system, even the odd "unfair" deletion is easily ignored. It takes habitual deletion to start losing out in that system.
Hoobajoob said:
Would it be possible to have flags work like uploads with successful flags raising the limit, while overturned flags lower it?
And yes, this would be something I'd like to see, as well. It would, at least, make things equal-ish on both sides.
Kikimaru said:
Still seeing a lot of "this post offends my artistic sensibilities" shite in here.
Just accept that some mods like stuff you don't and move on with your life.
Speaking of someone who talks about moving on with their lives, didn't you start off this thread by saying how you "literally don't care anymore"? You seem to care an awful lot about what everyone thinks for someone who protests so loudly how little they care...
And anyway, Danbooru explicitly states what is and isn't allowed, as everyone keeps having to remind you. It also explicitly states that it isn't a "whatever random crap" place like Gelbooru. As this entire topic is about how a mod should be punished for breaking those rules, clearly it's not just a "whatever goes, post furry all day everyday, if one mod likes it, then it can wallpaper the whole site!" thing.
NWSiaCB said:
18 approvals to get a cap bump, 2 deletions to decrement cap system
A problem with this is that it reduces some people's upload limits too much. For example:
Kikimaru: -2188 upload limit
magenta-crimson: -238
henmere: -334
Of course they would still be able to upload a little due to the 4 minimum cap. However increasing their limit past 4 would be very difficult. Making up for a -300 limit from old deleted posts would require 300*18=5400 new uploads to be approved. Assuming the user uploads 4 posts a day (since their upload limit is 4 after the minimum cap) and none of these new posts get deleted, it would require almost 4 years of doing this consistently just to get their upload limit above 4 posts.
In other words, it's basically impossible and they're stuck with the same low upload limit no matter what they do. This is the same issue that was brought up with the last attempted change to upload limits.
NWSiaCB said:
And anyway, Danbooru explicitly states what is and isn't allowed, as everyone keeps having to remind you. It also explicitly states that it isn't a "whatever random crap" place like Gelbooru. As this entire topic is about how a mod should be punished for breaking those rules, clearly it's not just a "whatever goes, post furry all day everyday, if one mod likes it, then it can wallpaper the whole site!" thing.
Please do some stat checking.
Notwithstanding that there are dozens of characters who simply ARE furry because that's the way they were created, I have uploaded fewer furry posts in the past 8 years than I uploaded total posts this month.
Apollyon said:
You're missing something about these privileged users you keep bringing up: The majority of users got promoted to Contributor and upwards because they earned it before by showing they could hang with the moderation process. That's not getting a "free pass", since they worked for their privileges and proved they don't need someone to watch over them.
Exactly as majority of the janitors here, hahaha
If this is part of the such and much worse posts happen to be posted by contrib+ that you said before, then you should have pointed out some examples instead of just mentioning them in passing. Because I'm not seeing these "such and much worse posts" from that set of users. That in itself is as bad as an appeal saying "things worse than this have been approved".
You're a janitor here. At least you could check my flags history for few examples.
Kikimaru said:
Please do some stat checking.
Notwithstanding that there are dozens of characters who simply ARE furry because that's the way they were created, I have uploaded fewer furry posts in the past 8 years than I uploaded total posts this month.
You don't seem to get the point.
Do you honestly think that you could say to the police, "It's alright, I only killed people three times this year!" and that would make it OK?
The point is that you're doing it at all.
NWSiaCB said:
You don't seem to get the point.
Do you honestly think that you could say to the police, "It's alright, I only killed people three times this year!" and that would make it OK?
The point is that you're doing it at all.
You tried to equate furry pictures with murder and your analogy went off the rails...
RaisingK said:
You tried to equate furry pictures with murder and your analogy went off the rails...
It's called reductio ad absurdium. I am not equating furry with murder, I'm saying that breaking the rules "only occasionally" is not a defense for breaking the rules. In fact, it's admission of not only guilt, but recidivism and remorselessness.
It's basically saying, "I got away with posting worse stuff last time, so this stuff I post should be fine, too! Then, when people are used to that, I'll just post even worse stuff again later to drop the standards even further!"
richie said:
Exactly as majority of the janitors here, hahaha
What are you even trying to type here?
You're a janitor here. At least you could check my flags history for few examples.
Alright. I've looked at your history of Flags and I think it's actually hurting your point here. The way you've made it sound in this thread is as if there's a current, rampant issue (read: happening right now) of upload quality with a large number of Contributors and upwards that skip the queue.
Granted, a lot of those flags were actually warranted. Thing is, in those 69 flags, I'm seeing posts from around 5 Contributors total, with some much older posts from albert bordering on 9+ years of age. The other larger problem is only 2 of those flags are from this year, with the rest from 2014 and 2013. This doesn't sound like the widespread, as-we-speak issue among that set of users that you've made it out to be here.
But I did notice two posts you flagged (post #1767558, post #1700156) re-approved by the same Janitor that's being brought into question with this thread.
Updated
NWSiaCB said:
It's called reductio ad absurdium. I am not equating furry with murder, I'm saying that breaking the rules "only occasionally" is not a defense for breaking the rules. In fact, it's admission of not only guilt, but recidivism and remorselessness.
It's basically saying, "I got away with posting worse stuff last time, so this stuff I post should be fine, too! Then, when people are used to that, I'll just post even worse stuff again later to drop the standards even further!"
I don't think you understand how Danbooru works tbh.
There are furry pictures because there are furry characters.
Simple as.
NWSiaCB said:
It's called reductio ad absurdium. I am not equating furry with murder, I'm saying that breaking the rules "only occasionally" is not a defense for breaking the rules. In fact, it's admission of not only guilt, but recidivism and remorselessness.
It's basically saying, "I got away with posting worse stuff last time, so this stuff I post should be fine, too! Then, when people are used to that, I'll just post even worse stuff again later to drop the standards even further!"
The rules are guidelines not hard rules. If an image is of substantial quality it's allowed to pass. Please stop harping on THE RULES, you're the only one that wants them hard line enforced.
Maybe they could use a little rewording to make it clear that only some of those things are outright banned (nude filters) but frankly most people understand.
It seems this thread is slowly turning into an argument that because some people do their own thing that the system is broken and its somehow entirely their fault. More specifically, I don't necessarily agree with uploading furry, but the anti-furry sentiment is getting silly, along with a number of the nitpicks I've seen from this debate. This sort of mindset seems to be seeping in throughout the site.
post #1573011 for a related example, was reported for being furry. It's got characters with fur on them, but this isn't pornographic. It's just an ordinary drawing of a humanoid fox and bird character, and its on topic as its from a Pixiv artist and a Japanese video game. It's not a Kikimaru upload, but from Altered. Someone decided that flagging it for furry was justified. I can't see who flagged it, but I'm suspicious whoever did had this misconception in mind. I bring this up to point to the faultiness of treating the guidelines as laws.
The fact that Kikimaru and Not_One_Of_Us keep getting trashed for their methods seems silly to me. Both are massive helpers to the site to begin with, and while they may occasionally play easy with their standards, their contribution to the site has been positive overall. Kikimaru has been a responsible user for most of his time here.
If something he uploads is deleted, and they don't show in a regular search, thats fine. I'm always appealing images, but its up to the janitors, mods, and Albert to do whatever they feel is right in referencing the general standard, which will never be shared. We all do what feels right, because thats the best we can do as a whole. And if he says he doesn't care anymore, it's because people are acting like what he's doing is somehow a crime. It's not, its a fuss at best, and a deleted upload at worst.
So in total, I agree with the administration. The rules are a guideline, not a law.
Log said:
The rules are guidelines not hard rules. If an image is of substantial quality it's allowed to pass. Please stop harping on THE RULES, you're the only one that wants them hard line enforced.
Isn't this subject matter issue going off topic?
"If an image is of substantial quality it's allowed to pass. "
That's the problem. Many pictures that aren't of substantial quality are getting forced through. Quality as in technical art skill, not subject matter. Isn't that the original topic of this thread?
Kikimaru said:
I don't think you understand how Danbooru works tbh.
There are furry pictures because there are furry characters.
Simple as.
The problem is, you don't.
There are "furry characters", but there's a difference between someone posting a comic with Teemo from LoL and someone posting a badly-drawn sketch of humanoid pokemon porn.
And to get to Buehbueh's point, Starfox or Smash Bros stuff is fine, what I'm talking about is clearly on the sketch of pokemon porn side, which again, has always been banned.
post #2020808
post #2020127
post #2020119
post #2014160
post #2013939
post #2012333
post #2012329
That's not even going deep into this, that's just half the stuff from the last two weeks, in spite of Kikimaru's insistence that it's OK if he only does it every now and then.
But hey, you're right, I'm focusing too much on furry porn because it's easier to objectively label. I can go into all the other things on the reasons to flag, too, like:
bad anatomy:
post #2021148
post #2008802
post #2013777
post #2021162
not anime related:
post #2008024
post #1993868
post #1828995
guro:
post #1932919
post #1958472
jpg artifacts:
post #2020164
post #1952467
watermark:
post #2021197
post #1994137
post #2021261
combinations of several:
post #2021227
just plain bad quality:
post #1993976
post #2018006
post #2022107
post #2021155
post #2014822
post #2020938
post #2020460
post #2020493
I'm not digging too deep, or taking any real effort to cherry pick, either.
And to keep this in with the main topic, note who's approved nearly everything I linked here that's been approved.
There is no quality and there are no rules Kikimaru can discern specifically because of that.
Toks said:
A problem with this is that it reduces some people's upload limits too much. For example:
Kikimaru: -2188 upload limit
magenta-crimson: -238
henmere: -334Of course they would still be able to upload a little due to the 4 minimum cap. However increasing their limit past 4 would be very difficult. Making up for a -300 limit from old deleted posts would require 300*18=5400 new uploads to be approved. Assuming the user uploads 4 posts a day (since their upload limit is 4 after the minimum cap) and none of these new posts get deleted, it would require almost 4 years of doing this consistently just to get their upload limit above 4 posts.
In other words, it's basically impossible and they're stuck with the same low upload limit no matter what they do. This is the same issue that was brought up with the last attempted change to upload limits.
So the problem is that users who have large numbers of deletions would be prevented from uploading tremendous numbers of art when they are actually punished for deletions? Isn't that just the system working as intended?
It was said in the first page that some doors need to be slammed in some faces. I took from that it meant demotions of user level or outright bans. Simply reducing post cap to a level they have to think more about what's worth uploading because it will get a quick approval, and what's worth holding back upon would actually be the easiest solution and best enforcer of the system as a whole in the long run.
To NWSiaCB: A lot of whats there is pretty bad, but see, I disagree on a lot of those too and if debated, that would be clear.
-The watermarked images have web addresses at the bottom, not gigantic marks across their middles. They fit the criterion of the web address tag.
-That Annie Mei one doesn't seem to have a problem at all, and its technically on topic as its anime themed, and I can't see anything resembling poor anatomy.
-The guro ones are on topic and aren't poorly drawn though, and while the guideline says not to upload that, they're otherwise perfectly fine for what they're intended to do. Heck, its a pretty populated tag, so I guess the rules on guro do need to be changed or clarified, they otherwise seem to fit the limitations.
-On the JPG artifacts, those are clear examples of ones that require deletion. On the furry porn, much of that is poorly drawn anyway, and that should be a perfectly acceptable flagging point, more than anything else.
-The captain america one is pretty bad, and She-Hulk is off topic, even if well drawn, but the Deadpool one should count as part of the artists repertoire, and fits in their style.
-Most of what you post as just plain bad are indeed off-topic/poorly drawn, but that first mech one is fitting of Nameo's art style and would in my view be acceptable.
The reality of this all, is that all of these are on different degrees of debatable. Many of them are poor, period, but a few of these are more than appeal worthy should they be flagged. You may simply have a higher standard, and thats fine. The best you can do is simply to hold your own uploading standards high at this point and carry them into your own uploading habits.
On Toks point, what if we compromised at 15/3 or 12/3 instead of 18/2? It would probably not as adversely affect many uploaders with prior poor histories. I think a compromise on that can be achieved and is possible.
Updated
Rastamepas said:
Why is this thread still open. It's all about NWSiaCB bashing Kikimaru and he doesn't even know what he is talking about. Not that I agree with Kikimaru's posts for the most part I still think you're blowing shit way out of proportion because you have some vendetta.
It's hard not to be bashing Kikimaru after forum #104714 - he basically came here to confess (even though no one ever mentioned him to begin with). Besides, weren't "poor uploaders" a part of this topic's agenda?
And I shall stop here for now, lest someone with thread-locking powers succumb to an itchy trigger finger.
EDIT: Grammar.
Updated
It might be a good idea to start new threads with more clear topics, e.g. one thread for bashing Kikimaru, another thread for discussing the issue of Danbooru's quality control (which again, involves only contributors and approvers) and if necessary a third thread for any potential formula changes, upload incentives/deterrents, etc.
Bashing kikimaru is fine and dandy by you guys but the negative record is getting a bit too far and too much unwarranted, even if he's the major character in the discussion of the thread so far.
My finger is extremely itchy right now but i will keep watch for some hope of any PEACEFUL AND CIVIL resolution/discussion in this thread. If this continues, i will be forced to lock this.
Please behave.
I think we should stop with the "Bashing Kikumaru" thread thing, not that I'm with Kikumaru but we don't use the forums for bashing any specific users.
Also, if we implemented something that the system will punished anyone who have many deleted posts in their records, good users like henmere and Krugger will be affected by the change unless someone decided to upgrade their accounts to contributor status, I know this since I've already witnessed the effects somehow.
