Dear mods / Image Quality Standarts?

Recently my posts are especially started to get flagged randomly so until this heavily quality control calms down or gets resolved I am going stop contributing to site because I can't make out what is right and what is wrong in terms of distinguishing what's even good acceptable anatomical standarts here anymore.

The posts I am talking about are these: post #2623103 the freshly uploaded ones such as post #2626272 post #2626275 and more importantly I really find the flag reason in post a bit funny post #2626250 and many more posts like that other than my posts.

>Bad legs. Especially her right leg looks off and is turned to a really weird degree (knee and foot is pointing to us), but it should point to the left.

Don't get me wrong I have really bad taste when it comes to uploading something new to the site however even though I find these recent flaggings really helpful to improve the quality standarts of the site but some of these reasons are very very personal and subjective view.

What I am trying to say is there there is no spesific quality rules are depicted in our site but if we are going to qualify our posts by these standarts then there should be rule. Like the Mercy post above the flagger's argument for flagging the post was "Bad legs" and then proceed to explaning why the leg porpotion is looked bad from subjective point of view. As far as my experiences says these flags are usually don't get reapproved because when you flag the post like this then other mods thinks like "hmm yeah this guy is right, this post looks really bad" and staining the whole quality of the image itself which I find it really unfair. I mean c'mon her right leg is not even look bad and unless told by third party it is not even noticable. So just because her right leg is bad the whole post is doomed to be deleted.

This is just unfair because this happened to many other posts even though we have many tags on the site that starts with, bad legs, bad anatomy, thin waist or other kinds of tags that has anatomical issues. In my humble opinion these posts should be approved as long as the quality looks really eye disturbing in the first place.

So in short I am going to stop contributing until some of our dear mods explain me what is danbooru's current quality standarts and why these posts are getting deleted because of these spesific and subjective views? If you are going to tell me that you guys are released new quality standarts for the site then I will directly follow this example and I will be really and extra careful with my future uploads. After all when my posts are getting flagged like that then I can't help but think about how did I even missed that bad portion of the body and start to question why my image quality standarts really bad compared to other people. I especially started to think in this way because of the recent flaggings and judging my standarts when I'm reading these post's flagging reasons.

PS: I'm not trying to complain about why my posts are getting flagged. If you look at other posts you can find the similiar flagging reasons in the same line. I just want to get clear picture of how can I be even be sure if the pictures I'm uploading to the site is good or bad so in that way I can be careful with my future uploads when contributing to the site.

Thanks for the hard work guys!
Sincerely.

I think the anatomy flagger is some overzealous guy going all over the place because the moderation queue has been full of things like that for days now.

Uh... as for Mercy post isn't that just the dumb cutesy Japanese pose where you try to bend your feet in almost to the point of dislocation? We have even tag created for this pose which is pigeon-toed, right? But I know it is pretty noticeable but personally I think it should be allowed because why not since I have seen so much worse posts and they are still alive. So much posts have been deleted recently because of this subjective reasons even thought the overall quality of images pretty much acceptable and good from looking at them objective view. Anyways mods are doing pretty good job imo and if they are not approving these kinds of posts then I'm sure they know what they are doing.

The problem is that there can't be set quality standards for that sort of thing unless we're going to break out the pixel rulers and protractors. It's a subjective thing that's going to change as often as people get added and removed from the list of approvers. The only real way to gauge "how bad something can be" is for it to be flagged and see if it gets approved. Some moderators (like myself) don't like sexually-focused anatomy like in those posts; in order: huge hips and thick thighs coming to small shins and tiny feet (Sara Bellum style), gigantic ass and spherical breasts, extremely wide hips with appropriate huge ass, and rib-skinny girl with large breasts and skeletal-grade thigh gap.

Would I approve them? No. Would somebody else? Three out of four so far. Will somebody in a couple years from now? Who knows? Writing it up in a wiki would require it to either be so strict as to be impossible to enforce or so vague as to not be worthwhile.

Remember: a flag isn't a deletion, it's a request for review. People don't need to knee-jerk and whip out all the rule books like they currently do five minutes after a flag is submitted unless the post actually gets deleted.

Haselnuts said:

I think it should be allowed because why not since I have seen so much worse posts and they are still alive.

"There's worse" is not a valid argument as to why one shouldn't flag bad art. Flag those "so much worse" posts if they're bad, don't use them as a scapegoat against flags.

Well if these posts are getting because of these reasons especially when they are flagged like this then I can't help but feel uneasy when I'm uploading something to the site. By uneasy I'm especially questioning and double checking the image before uploading and thinking if this post is also going to be flagged. This isn't really good feeling and you can't upload freely when you have fear of your posts will flagged for subjective reasons like that as you explained in your comment. This is problem for me because when I see something new and hasn't been uploaded to site then I'm always in doubt whether it should be upload these posts. This fear has especially started to grow inside of me recently since so many posts have started to removed from the site because of these reasons. So that's why I have asked if there is any quality standart in the site since I can't be sure if the image I'm going to upload is good to be aproved by you dearly mods but since it approving these images seems to be subjective matter then it confirms my fears even more. Please don't get me wrong I'm trying to complain or cry about my deleted posts. Other posts are also getting unapproved or deleted by the same reason because of the recent flags thats been happening around these days. So I wondered if new standart was set by mods that I've missed and wondered why even though there are tags for these posts such as bad_leg, skinny, huge_ass, thin waist or Hasel mentioned pigeon-toed exists on the site then why they are getting deleted rather than tagged by those tags. As long as they are not noticable like in this post #2619175 it's really hard to figure out small mistakes like in my Mercy post or at least for me even though I find the overall body and art quality rather good.

I'm not sure what to tell you other than to stop fearing flags and instead, if anything, fear deletions. Any post, even the best of the best, can be flagged. And those will be reapproved. It's just how the site works and not much can be done without removing the moderation system, which is essentially what Gelbooru is.

And in the end, it's a website with pictures on it, not something life depends upon.

EDIT:

Qpax said:

So I wondered if new standart was set by mods that I've missed and wondered why even though there are tags for these posts such as bad_leg, skinny, huge_ass, thin waist or Hasel mentioned pigeon-toed exists on the site then why they are getting deleted rather than tagged by those tags.

They, as far as I know, aren't getting deleted in any large scale. They're being flagged. These tags should be added to a post that contains them, but there's still a limit to reality. If I uploaded this image, putting wide_hips and thick_thighs on it wouldn't validate it staying on the site. It should be tagged that way, those are wide hips and meaty thighs, but it doesn't fit human anatomy even remotely close enough to be approved. Now, where does that line lie where something stays or goes? That's inherently up to the approvers, and will change as often as they do.

Thank you for your feedback. It's just that I want to upload good posts rather than polluting the site with low quality ones. I'm seeking answers because I also want to improve my standarts when I'm uploading something to new site. I love this site because this is the only place where you can find good fanarts and as I said these kind of flagging reasons are at least helping me grow as contributer so nothing is wrong with that. However and recently when you posts gets flagged with those reasons then you can't help but wonder what went wrong while uploading those flagged posts. That's why I said it's matter of subjective subjects and as you explained there is difference in terms of evaluating these posts and it differs from person to person. Which also means and lets give a example from that Mercy image while I find the overall quality pretty acceptable then some guy comes and flag the post with that reason you initally didn't noticed when you first uploaded the image. So I find it rather baffling those minor details are the reason for one image to get removed even you think the quality is above the avarage of acceptable quality terms in the site.

Sorry I didn't meant to cause any misunderstanding and I hope I have explained my point of view regarding to this issue. That's why I said I will be stopping the contributing to site until I'm aware of what the hell is really going on with the approving and flagging system recently so that I can be extra careful with my future uploads.

Qpax said:

Thank you for your feedback. It's just that I want to upload good posts rather than polluting the site with low quality ones. I'm seeking answers because I also want to improve my standarts when I'm uploading something to new site. I love this site because this is the only place where you can find good fanarts and as I said these kind of flagging reasons are at least helping me grow as contributer so nothing is wrong with that. However and recently when you posts gets flagged with those reasons then you can't help but wonder what went wrong while uploading those flagged posts. That's why I said it's matter of subjective subjects and as you explained there is difference in terms of evaluating these posts and it differs from person to person. Which also means and lets give a example from that Mercy image while I find the overall quality pretty acceptable then some guy comes and flag the post with that reason you initally didn't noticed when you first uploaded the image. So I find it rather baffling those minor details are the reason for one image to get removed even you think the quality is above the avarage of acceptable quality terms in the site.

Sorry I didn't meant to cause any misunderstanding and I hope I have explained my point of view regarding to this issue. That's why I said I will be stopping the contributing to site until I'm aware of what the hell is really going on with the approving and flagging system recently so that I can be extra careful with my future uploads.

@Qpax Just keep on doing what you do, man. I don't think your uploading style is bad at all. From what it looks like, you still have very very few flags, and most of them were resolved within a brief period. You're a very diligent uploader, and it's clear that most of it is good quality.

Honestly I think this is more of a problem with the flagging system (and the improvements needed for it) than anything else. I've had the fortune of nearly none of my posts being flagged for review (save for one with an invalid flag reason) since being granted unlimited uploads, but I'm still under the same danger as much as you and all the other uploaders are of flagging -- it isn't unique to any one person. buehbueh provided a number of good suggestions in forum #126292, although when or if they'll be considered is still under debate.

Anyways, I chalk it up to mostly one or two janitor+ doing this kind of flagging (kind of obvious who it is at this point, I suppose), but I don't really fault them that much for it. It's just that I don't see flags and approvals as a purely black-or-white issue -- there's an ebb and flow to it. If there are way too many images flagged into the queue, it diminishes the efforts of approvers trying to sift out whichever posts are acceptable before they expire and eventually the flagger will get a number of posts deleted successfully, even if some of them shouldn't be. Approvers are not pieces of machinery that can immediately detect what to keep or what not to keep, and all of them have varying standards on what to accept as OOZ662 has mentioned about himself.

If your posts continue to get flagged into deletion, it's only a sign you should be more careful about what you upload. But if they are subsequently approved (even during such a hectic time with so many flagged images in the queue), then you can continue as you were. That's how I've treated it so far. And there's always the deletion appeals thread, although as to how effective that is...

EDIT: Seems I have another one. Huh.

How about just waiting for those posts and/or use the appeal function or a quick defending comment in the comments :P?
Don't really see to make such a fuss over some posts, since they are still pending approval for three days (especially if the flaw is pointed out and I probably can say that for the Mercy posts. The leg is not still not good)
And if something is random, then I'm sorry. I also don't see every anatomy flaw on posts I don't flag.

EDIT And to get some clear view: post #2626275 and post #2626272 wasn't flagged by me. But also here is an explanation given and the second post might still deserve a feedback (those shoulders D:)

In all honesty, I even contacted Renim to look over those flagged posts, because there are way more flagged posts right now than I had during September/October while I also flagged some posts and that keeps me wondering if the quality is lower than before or if I my criticism against those posts is too harsh. In other words,flags should be reviewed as well.

Because 1, the appeal function is nigh practically useless on QC's, and 2, 'quick defending comments' don't always mean other approvers will see the post.

There really is a point to making such a fuss over posts. The approvers aren't omniscient. If someone with unlimited flags is going around dictating what gets flagged and increasing the workload of other approvers at the current state where there is a lack of them, then of course it's going to cause trouble. The permission is deserved, yes, but with such a great power comes great responsibility.

Some people, myself included, appreciate the scrutiny and think it's deserved on some posts. Other times, it isn't (post #2616662, post #2623103). This has happened multiple times with these flags. The fact of the matter is that there are limits placed on users without unlimited flags for a reason -- you're given that permission probably because you're expected to be careful with it and clean up the bad posts that deserve cleaning. But setting the bar too incredibly high against the interest of other users is for lack of a better word, detrimental.

I can't say what you (or anyone else that has the same habits) are doing is wrong, since that's how the system works. It's just that it's a bit irresponsible to think that just flagging a post means that approvers are guaranteed to look at it again. That's the wrong part. Whether a post gets reapproved within the 3-day span isn't just depending on that post's quality, but also how many approvers are active that day. OOZ admitted it himself that there are posts that he wouldn't approve but that others would.

A naive solution would be to increase the number of active approvers by distributing some permissions, but even then that doesn't automatically nullify the impact that flagging has on the queue and for approvers. More often than not, flagging has a negative bias that makes approvers be more wary of an image, even when the reasons aren't considered. Some are obvious "yes's", but for the more borderline posts, being flagged makes that divide even more prominent. I'm to believe we're better a diamond with a flaw, than a pebble without one.

EDIT: To add, we do have error tags. I just chalk it up to more users thinking about flagging first than tagging bad_* later. After all, flagging keeps your name anonymous, but editing those tags in makes you lose that anonymity.

No, it is not. Don't know where the idea comes from, but appealing a post will also generate a blue text on top of the post even before the deletion. We even have a seperate page for appeals.
So...unless one considers flags as unfair and as an attack, then I don't really see the point of this topic..
Like I said, before making a comment and saying that one has too high standards, then I say that I also notice the amount of flags and that it needs to be reviewed. Note that this comes from me and I wasn't forced into contacting some approvers.
And yeah, Janitors still should look over the posts. There is a little message that is popping up when you didn't visit the queue. You can turn it off with CSS, but meh. Or visiting status:flagged. Or visit this here for recently flagged posts: http://sonohara.donmai.us/post_flags.
All I can say here is that flagged posts are easy to detect, even older ones.

Some people, myself included, appreciate the scrutiny and think it's deserved on some posts. Other times, it isn't (post #2616662, post #2623103). This has happened multiple times with these flags.

About that part: Do you really think that flags need a 100% success rate? Because it kinda sounds that way and I don't see the reason to point that out. If you think that every flag should come through, then, well, the boat is already sunken.
Like OOZ said: Flags are there for another review and not a definitive opinion against a post -> There is a high likelihood a post gets re-approved if it is good in one way.

Then it would require anyone who would be interested to do such a thing with their measly 1 appeal a day. Why I mention I think it's practically useless is because although it might take up more priority on the queue with it's perceived importance, it is an approver's job anyway to inspect such a post regardless of if there is an appeal or not. That's what a QC is. The appeal may help with that, but even without, those posts should be given a fair chance (because again, not everyone sees everything).

I'm not an approver, so I don't know the inner workings of the job -- this may all be conjecture for all I know.

Mikaeri said:

Then it would require anyone who would be interested to do such a thing with their measly 1 appeal a day. Why I mention I think it's practically useless is because although it might take up more priority on the queue with it's perceived importance, it is an approver's job anyway to inspect such a post regardless of if there is an appeal or not. That's what a QC is. The appeal may help with that, but even without, those posts should be given a fair chance (because again, not everyone sees everything).

I'm not an approver, so I don't know the inner workings of the job -- this may all be conjecture for all I know.

That is correct. Like I said, those tools are helping the non-flagger.
And I am in great favor in using those tools if I were the counter-side. The flagger stated their opinion, so should the other side be able to. Be it via appeals or comments. If the Janitor then reads them is another story :P.

Provence said:

About that part: Do you really think that flags need a 100% success rate? Because it kinda sounds that way and I don't see the reason to point that out. If you think that every flag should come through, then, well, the boat is already sunken.
Like OOZ said: Flags are there for another review and not a definitive opinion against a post -> There is a high likelihood a post gets re-approved if it is good in one way.

Because you are a sly editor, I'll go ahead :p

No. They don't. Ideally, they would, if every user knew what could be considered objectively bad (note: impossible). Fact of the matter is that sometimes your flags are just petty on details, and that's what's causing issues with the community. When you flag as frequently as you do, you're inherently raising the bar for what's comfortable or not comfortable to upload for yourself only, whether other users like that or not. In some respects, it's a good thing, in others, bad. As I said before, the greater problem at stake here is: If someone with unlimited flags is going around dictating what gets flagged and increasing the workload of other approvers at the current state where there is a lack of them, then of course it's going to cause trouble.

Because not every approver gets the chance to review everything in the flagged queue, if you just submit a bunch of flags in bulk, then there's going to be some higher percentage of posts that won't get fair review. Putting it quite bluntly, it's demotivating not just to the users, but to anyone aspiring to be a contributor in addition to current contributors. I will say it again, it's detrimental.

So...you don't think that three days are enough for consideration?
Maybe there is a lack of active Janitors, but why should the flagging be affected by it? I think that three whole days is a lot of time. And if a post is good enough, then it will get approved. That won't change. But ok, I repeat myself over and over and over. It's becoming quite pointless to even argue for it, if that is not understood. I still understand that and know that posts might get re-approved. The standard is not set by the flagger, but by the Janitors.
What you mean with "petty in detail" is btw. just how I write flags: If there are flaws, then they get mentioned in an objective manner (at least I try that). That often causes long texts, but I can also resort on the simpe quality check.....

Also by the currently gone posts that were flagged by me (total amount of 10), there were 8 deletions, one re-flag (after the re-approval) and one re-approval and every (deleted) post has at least 7 reviews.
What would you draw from that? That those other 8 posts didn't receive fair review (in all honesty, one post is deleted and I don't really get why..I've left a comment under that post).

Not going to say much, since I have other things on my slate, but anyways

I'm not talking about how you write flags, I'm talking about what you write them for. When a post gets twice-appealed by two different users and gets reapproved in less than 24h, that's on you to adjust your standards for flagging. But when you force your hand in this roundabout way, all you're saying is "I'm not okay with all these, so instead I'll just brute the queue."

Three days is plenty of time on any normal day where the queue is moderately packed with images to review. Sure. But you've been flagging what... 10, 20, 30 images a day? I don't really know. But it's a lot. Everyone has things in their own lives to attend to, 3 days during their workweek might as well be 0 time for this site, even if they are a diligent approver on any other day.

And there are more of the same kinds of comments being posted from a variety of users noting this behavior: "Someone's being overzealous/obnoxious about flagging etc etc"

Just be considerate, because you not doing so is causing a lot of harm -- even if you think you aren't.

Mikaeri said:

Not going to say much, since I have other things on my slate, but anyways

I'm not talking about how you write flags, I'm talking about what you write them for. When a post gets twice-appealed by two different users and gets reapproved in less than 24h, that's on you to adjust your standards for flagging. But when you force your hand in this roundabout way, all you're saying is "I'm not okay with all these, so instead I'll just brute the queue."

And there are more of the same kinds of comments being posted from a variety of users noting this behavior: "Someone's being overzealous/obnoxious about flagging etc etc"

First: That post is resolved. Don't know why you are bringing this post up over and over again. But it certainly doesn't help this discussion, since it's already resolved and I moved on.
Second: The mod queue is always full. I try to keep it as low as possible (meaning we got down from over 25 pages to 15 pages). In other words, the three pages (60 posts = 3 pages) are not even reaching how it was before one year. So the workload is even lower for approvers. I really don't like this argument, but it might be fitting here: Sometimes, it is better when you where there in the past, so you can compare two situations. You are missing the state from one year ago, so it might seem to much at first, because you are accustomed to something else.
That means if your concern is the workload of approvers, then it probably doesn't work.

Third: Wow, and what is their reasoning why a post should stay? "The flagger is obnoxious" is only causing a rule break with howto:comment if anything.

I bring up that post because it's a prime example of what you're doing wrong. And the same can apply to many other posts. Second, don't get your head so up in the clouds. Just because you in particular are chewing down on the queue, it doesn't mean there still isn't a lot of work to be done. Just be considerate is all I'm asking, and I'm sure others are also.

That's all I can say. It's kinda clear you have an extremely staunch opinion on this so I won't bother until someone else chimes in.

EDIT: Well, I still am a fairly new user after all :P

As for the commenting, they're guidelines. But people are still going to bend them anyway. You've seen them, you know about them.

No, it's not^^. It's just another post that got re-approved and I learn from that. So don't even try to be vindictive.
And yes, I can say that. Over 50 Janitors are there, the majority is active here. So..18 for 50 Janitors...that is kinda clear to me that there is enough space.
But I can only repeat myself, since I've already contacted some Janitors, because the pure amount of flagged posts is higher. If justified...we'll see. But probably they are.