Himuro_(dobu_no_hotori) getting a lot of flags lately.

I'm noticing someone is consistently targeting just one artist for flagging. While I do agree that a good deal of the images in question are flag worthy, the degree to which it's happening, including to images that don't carry obvious anatomical mistakes seems a bit extreme without a prior discussion first, since it's just one artist. At least a few of the images warrant the bad_anatomy tag instead, and a couple didn't seem to have any glaring problems at all.

artist #34070/himuro_(dobu_no_hotori) is the artist in question. Am I jumping the gun here in thinking something is wrong or is this OK to bring up? I don't mind if the mods agree with the current flags, as long as it was discussed a bit.

I think that many of the flagged pieces deserve to be flagged and that many of them don't deserve to be flagged.

It's indiscriminate and bad.

I'm okay with flagging things that are grotesque or bad beyond argument, but that doesn't describe everything that this artist has been making. Some of the pictures only have minor problems. Someone just doesn't like the artist's sense of body fat.

To note, I don't even like this artist or know them by tag, but I noticed the same thing, and knew what you were talking about before I followed your link.

buehbueh said:

I'm noticing someone is consistently targeting just one artist for flagging. (...) without a prior discussion first, since it's just one artist.

Why exactly does it matter (especially given the flags are well warranted most of the time)? Would you feel different if there were 3+ artists on scope of one person instead?
I'd not be surprised for the thread if the flags were having my kind of approach from a few years ago with rather vague descriptions, but all of them seem to have their faults pointed out in there. Every single one.

It probably doesn't matter very much, if it is clear nothing is wrong. I brought it up as a matter of communication, since it seemed right to bring up when a single artist is targeted after being approved for so long. Since no one had said anything in the forum, and most of the images flagged were not re-approved, asking would clear up my biases, and if there is consensus on the flags by the staff, I won't press the issue.

As Wareya noted, many of these flags are correct, but a few seem unreasonable, or were trying too hard to be clever/angry. I re-approved some which felt justifiable with a bad_anatomy tag, or which didn't carry poor line work and coloring. Noting timing, someone had to return to the artist each day and analyze the posts to find flag reasons, and had continued regularly including today, that seemed worth bringing up separately.

And I don't think anything was all that wrong with your flagging before. It was warranted at the time, and helped improve quality immensely by spurring people to get rid of the old cruft, and to be more stringent with newer uploads, something I appreciate. Aggressive flagging has its place. This event seemed discussion worthy, and if the staff disagree with me, I meant no foul in bringing it up, and apologize for it.

I never cared about this artist one way or the other, but now that this thread makes me look, it bothers me that the flagger is going back as far as posts 4 years old, not to mention unnecessary commentary that has nothing to do with the flagged image, as in post #1128839 . Stuff like that only seems to confirm that they simply hate the artist's work.

buehbueh said:
since it seemed right to bring up when a single artist is targeted after being approved for so long.

Right here, I'll dare noting 90% of the currently deleted posts from that artist didn't (still don't) have an approver and probably didn't have one before you stepped in to some you personally got back to.

Noting timing, someone had to return to the artist each day and analyze the posts to find flag reasons, and had continued regularly including today, that seemed worth bringing up separately.

I find it admirable, wading through that garbage to actually pinpoint issues, no matter how zealous, 'clever/angry' they are. Nothing wrong in reapproving them if you find them erroneous though.

It's not something alert worthy though. It would be, if the pictures/artist were actually good, which they're not particularly.

>I find it admirable

I don't. It's actually kind of disgusting and pretentious. The site's standards will not just become more tight over time; they also loosen. Deleting something is basically a deathwish so that image can never be uploaded again without an argument. If there's a short period of time during which something is deemed unacceptable, is deleted, and then later becomes considered acceptable again, it's just not right that it has to go through that shit to be considered legitimate content again.

>It's not something alert worthy though.

It certainly is. Someone expressly going after a specific artist's work is going to put that artist's work through much more scrutiny than any other artist's images. This is personalized, inherently biased behavior.

If you believe that somehow these images that mostly contain rather major anatomical flaws will become legitimate content down the road you can appeal them at that time.

I literally just said why I don't consider that logic acceptable.

The artist is discrimately being held up to much more scrutiny than most of the art on the site in the first place, and that's just bad. It's not even a matter of the site's coverage scope. It's just a bone to pick with this artist's style. The chances of legitimate covered art being flagged are much higher just because it falls under the same artist.

Second, it's not vigilant to aggressively delete old pictures to the current site standard, because the site's standards vary solely based on what approvers and flaggers are active, and things will constantly fall through the cracks if and when they might become acceptable again. It's not reasonable to expect people to follow with reapproving deleted images unless the artist or picture is just overtly popular or famous.

I don't honestly think most of these images are acceptable, but I've seen at least three that I think are reasonable, and the flagging reasons on those are among the most cherrypicking (sometimes even wrong) that I've ever seen. When you really have to struggle to look for a specific problem in an image to flag it (even as far as to pick a problem that doesn't exist), it shouldn't really be flagged.

Oh my god, not again.
How is it that regular users inherently have to be mortally offended because garbage is being axed?

The site's standards will not just become more tight over time; they also loosen.

The reason to which you were at all able to acquire approval privileges comes solely from several mods having issues with standards becoming much too loose, particularly with help of a certain janitor. (It's a sticky thread and it also links to what sprouted that course) One was able to manipulate the entire site to find those misshaped monstrosities (or otherwise poorly drawn trash) worth baring teeth at the flaggers for (by some, seemingly yourself included).

It's just a bone to pick with this artist's style. The chances of legitimate covered art being flagged are much higher just because it falls under the same artist.

Flag ≠ Deletion. Cope with it. However, if 8+ approvers share the flagger's sentiment, then maybe, just maybe, the artist is rightfully put under much higher scrutiny now? I'll hint that he mostly draws the most popular tags here (which theoretically are easier to get approved) and /still/ doesn't manage to be 'saved'. Think about it.

Second, it's not vigilant to aggressively delete old pictures to the current site standard, because the site's standards vary solely based on what approvers and flaggers are active, and things will constantly fall through the cracks if and when they might become acceptable again.

And why not? Do you seriously believe that in this specific case, malformed beings are going to miraculously become acceptable, to bring such a point up?
On another note, you have what it takes to not allow 'things fall through cracks'. Feel free to use that ability. And don't be surprised to be judged upon it, much like you judge a flagger right now. But unlike a flagger, you don't need a written reason to take action.

It's not reasonable to expect people to follow with reapproving deleted images unless the artist or picture is just overtly popular or famous.

Yes it is. Everyone can be part of the hunt for unreasonable deletions and appealing stuff, with no repercussions.

I don't honestly think most of these images are acceptable

Thank god.

but I've seen at least three that I think are reasonable, and the flagging reasons on those are among the most cherrypicking (sometimes even wrong) that I've ever seen.

Then appeal/approve them. It's just another item in the modqueue in the end.

How is it that regular users inherently have to be mortally offended because garbage is being axed?

Because as a side effect of the means, some stuff that's not garbage is being axed? Why would I not say something when it goes a little too far? I don't want to see it all treated the same.

(It's a sticky thread and it also links to what sprouted that course)

Yes, I've read the entire thread, and it's a much less insidious thread than you're presenting it.

Wait, am I supposed to think I'm special because I have some minor privilege? That's not happening.

However, if 8+ approvers share the flagger's sentiment, then maybe, just maybe, the artist is rightfully put under much higher scrutiny now?

I don't think "not caring" falls into the same bucket as "sharing the sentiment".

And why not? Do you seriously believe that in this specific case, malformed beings are going to miraculously become acceptable, to bring such a point up?

You're talking an abstract point on a general thing out of context. It doesn't apply that way.

Yes it is. Everyone can be part of the hunt for unreasonable deletions and appealing stuff, with no repercussions.

Then why do you sound so upset right now?

wareya said:

Then why do you sound so upset right now?

Take a deep breath, you're the one that's the most upset here.

Personally, I see himuro upload his works on twitter from time to time but his anatomy started becoming so glaringly bad that I unfollowed him.

Take a deep breath, you're the one that's the most upset here.

That's news to me, I don't feel upset at all.

wareya said:

That's news to me, I don't feel upset at all.

Just a side note, but I just want to say that, that is one of the worst things to say.

It's possible to word it worse. I used "feel" for a reason. If people don't take honesty seriously then there's no point in talking.

As a person who likes causing arguments [Not on here at least], if someone asks/says you're mad, ignore it. Because if you acknowledge in any way your state of mind, an argument is more less going to break out.

*seeing the said artist's posts
Holy cow
Is that flagger has OCD or what?
Let's admit it, while it's good to improve the site, it also creeps me out.
I mean, he/she pointed every single point (which is good) but also in the same time makes it plain creepy.

Sacriven said:

*seeing the said artist's posts
Holy cow
Is that flagger has OCD or what?
Let's admit it, while it's good to improve the site, it also creeps me out.
I mean, he/she pointed every single point (which is good) but also in the same time makes it plain creepy.

I don't see the problem. What's so creepy about some detailed descriptions? It's like being freaked out by an instruction manual.
More points pointed out, more info for one to decide if the flagged post is worth keeping. It is a good thing indeed.

Isn't it an unwritten rule to avoid flagging old posts? And generally speaking, only targeting a single tag feels wrong, as something personal rather than an attempt to improve danbooru. And while "there are worse images not being deleted" is a terrible argument in general, it does bring up the question about whether singling out something to zealously flag doesn't mean you can try to decrease the amount of things you aren't personally interested in on danbooru, which is, from what I've gathered from the forum, a mentality that we're actively trying to avoid. If it was a character or series tag that was being targeted I'd have definitely spoken up against it. When it's an artist though it makes sense that when something is badly drawn the rest of his pictures might also be, so maybe here it's not really something alarming.

Borrator said:

Isn't it an unwritten rule to avoid flagging old posts?

It was, but not anymore.

And generally speaking, only targeting a single tag feels wrong, as something personal rather than an attempt to improve danbooru.

If flagging single tag feels wrong, then how we should feel about notorious posting of single tag especially by contributors+ who can literally flood danbooru with their favourite tag without real chances of control by others?