Donmai

[Voting Thread] Contributor Status

Posted under General

This topic has been locked.

Please post all non-voting discussions in the following thread (topic #13113).

We've gotten at least one of the Admins to agree to sending items back to the queue (albert forum #119011), and one of the Admins (Type-kun forum #119062) to agree to my idea specifically in forum #119058 utilizing the above idea.

Quick recap:

Level 0 would be as it currently stands with the unlimited uploads permission. However, if a certain number of queue-bypass uploads are flagged and then subsequently deleted within a certain time period, then that user would be moved to Level 1 restrictions.

Level 1 would send a certain random percentage of queue-bypass uploads back to the moderation queue. If they prove themselves again by having under a certain amount of deleted queue-bypass uploads, then they'll be moved back to Level 0. If however their deleted queue-bypass uploads exceeds a certain amount, then they would be moved to Level 2, and so on and so forth.

Note: Queue-bypass uploads are uploads that are intended to bypass the queue (this would include any random sends IF this were to be implemented). They would not include voluntary uploads sent to the queue.

Therefore, I propose that this thread be a voting thread for the next 7 days. Every user will be allowed one post with one vote using the nomenclature +1/-1 to indicate their thoughts on the idea, along with any caveats to the idea they might have.

I'd ask the Mods/Admins to monitor this thread and delete any forum post that is not a vote. Votes can be edited, but no more than the user's one vote will be allowed.

Finally, this post will count as my vote on the above idea.

+1, no caveats.

Updated by Apollyon

+1, but I'd like to see Level 0 send some random % of posts to the queue instead of it being a free ride....

Otherwise there will be no change at all.
Besides the flagging system is outdated. To keep track of every Contributor's uploads is a pain.

Updated

Provence said:

+1, but I'd like to see Level 0 send some random % of posts to the queue instead of it being a free ride....

Otherwise there will be no change at all.

+1. This is a relatively straightforward way to make sure contributors are keeping up the quality of their uploads without adding too much to queue or nullifying the purpose of contributors.

-1.

I'm actually ambivalent about the whole sending stuff to the queue randomly thing but I'm also of the opinion that flagging is more than sufficient if you think an image needs QC. Plus, flagging grabs your attention more than something in queue (red border is a lot more alarming than blue after all).

-1.
Feels like this is only going to create more problems for everyone in the future if it is approved.
I still don't understand how a topic about Approvers in the beginning got altered into a topic about whether or not you should start sending random Contributors' uploads back to the queue.

-1.

I don't think placing restrictions on Contributors long after the fact is an effective solution, less so when this only came up following a discussion about the lack of Approvals.

Stan_Miller said:

-1.
Feels like this is only going to create more problems for everyone in the future if it is approved.
I still don't understand how a topic about Approvers in the beginning got altered into a topic about whether or not you should start sending random Contributors' uploads back to the queue.

I honestly don't understand, either. This is why I only made few posts in that thread and only after getting brought up in the discussion.

-1.

I'm not strictly opposed to it, but I don't think it will solve anything. The possibility of getting flagged already makes contributors "think twice." Flagging is also better at cleaning up sub-par posts than this system, because it specifically targets bad posts instead of picking randomly. Additionally, I don't want to slow the queue down any further, and albert said that in order to generate meaningful data about uploader quality, the system would have to send more posts to the queue that the queue can currently handle.

I'm not against more contributor oversight, but I don't think this is the way to do it.

-1 (for now)

I more and more get the impression that the main QC mechanisms here on Danbooru are crippled, namely the mod queue (manpower shortage?) and the flagging system (rarely used?).

Concerning the latter:

Kadoya said:

I'm actually ambivalent about the whole sending stuff to the queue randomly thing but I'm also of the opinion that flagging is more than sufficient if you think an image needs QC. Plus, flagging grabs your attention more than something in queue (red border is a lot more alarming than blue after all).

OOZ662 said:

I'd rather that flagging become less of a stigma and simply more widely used. A pipedram, I know.

Sacriven said:

Nope. Flagging system is already enough. All that we need is the "will" to do it.

vs.

Provence said:

Sacriven said:

Provence said:

I've a question: How many times are you flagging an image?

In case you're forgot, we're only capable to flag post once a day.

Just flagged two uploads in a row. So this is not right. But ok, I wonder why, though.
Maybe it has something to do that I've approval powers? But I think that this statement is not quite right.

Extract from help:users:

Member: Flag at most one post per day, if their account is at least one week old.
Gold: Flag up to 10 posts per day.
Post Approver: Flag an unlimited number of posts per day.

It follows that the normal user on Danbooru can only flag ONE post per day. This is a laughable amount. Even 10 posts a day is barely enough to ensure proper QC. There are dozens of posts in the last 3 days alone (status:active age:..3d) that deserve to be pushed to the mod queue.

That said, OOZ662 and Sacriven are essentially right. We certainly need more "will".

~ mentioned users: @Kadoya @OOZ662 @Sacriven @Provence

+1
as flagging obviously doesn't discipline contribs+ whatsoever, while trying to directly and personally pointing out one's shortcomings is even worse and may result in personal retortions

1 2