Dear mods / Image Quality Standarts?

Grahf said:

I think the biggest demotivation I had was my own damn fault. I commissioned an artbook which got posted to e-hentai that someone then fully uploaded onto here. I was kicking my own ass for that hard for about a week or two.

Hmmm... perchance it wasn't Anmi's C91 artbook, was it? If it was, I'll apologize, but I rarely source from sadpanda in the first place (not a fan of uploading scans unless they're really high quality). Perhaps you're thinking he share it with you ahead of time before publishing so you can publish it here shrug.

That being said, I really do dislike the sort of snooping that goes around in sites like sadpanda, especially when they have their own legal issues to sort out with Japanese publishers. I sometimes imagine what if a Wani published full color manga ended up here, and what legal trouble that would mean for the site. I mean, we already get away, haphazardly, with uploading pinups and covers from them if you look under some of the magazine copyrights.

Not even just that though. I think uploading artbooks are a really cheap way to get favorites, especially given at the expense of the original scanner/uploader. What makes it even more exacerbating is the fact that 1, these sorts of scans usually get extremely high score counts compared to fanart, and 2, there are a number of uploaders that fail to source the original scan when they have not scanned it themselves (these uploaders are very easy to find, you probably know who they are if you look under source:none scan). Of course, I'm guilty of this also, but I at the very least always source the original place I got it from.

EDIT: From a larger perspective, often this site really feels like a stupid fight between uploaders who always want to be responsible for the best uploads here. But I see DB more as a potluck gathering of images -- if one really wanted to be selfish, best way to do that would be just keep all those images to themselves.

Mikaeri said:

Hmmm... perchance it wasn't Anmi's C91 artbook, was it? If it was, I'll apologize, but I rarely source from sadpanda in the first place (not a fan of uploading scans unless they're really high quality). Perhaps you're thinking he share it with you ahead of time before publishing so you can publish it here shrug.

Nah, it was the first Harucos book by Haruhisky.

And what has this to do with flagging now? Looks like your points are not against flags, but against getting sniped.

This isn't just about flagging. Qpax has complained himself about how being a good uploader seems to mean, in the current state of things, that you exhibit exploitative uploading behavior. Auto-refreshing your queue, minimal-average tagging, and not going out of your way to search for anything other than that. The grassroots uploaders frequently have better habits (tagging, upload care, sometimes even commentary and translations) but yet suffer because "it's better if you upload only the best stuff". Flagging, sometimes, is a detriment to that, and encourages that kind of slyness.

Some posts deserve flagging, I agree. We'll always be privy to that. But as I said multiple times before, sometimes these flags are really, really petty. And you're almost one of the most offending approvers ticking on "post has poor quality" even though most other approvers reserve that for the worst of the worst. Like, what do you do that for? To rub it in? One somewhat bad mistake in anatomy when the rest of the post would have likely passed and it's "poor quality"? What's really poor quality then?

What's more upsetting is that you give out positive feedback to such users who actually do do that sort of thing. At the very least, they tag their uploads okay, but take this for example -- I've NEVER uploaded a work by kekemotsu before. The one time I came very close to doing it, someone uploaded it with less tags than I had, and I basically just copypasted mine in.

Which is why I think there's absolutely no respect for uploaders that do that, just leaving others to garden their shit while the uploaders who do tag stuff well just have to turn their heads the other way.

EDIT: Though I admit my concerns belong more in topic #13268.

Mikaeri said:

This isn't just about flagging. Qpax has complained himself about how being a good uploader seems to mean, in the current state of things, that you exhibit exploitative uploading behavior. Auto-refreshing your queue, minimal-average tagging, and not going out of your way to search for anything other than that. The grassroots uploaders frequently have better habits (tagging, upload care, sometimes even commentary and translations) but yet suffer because "it's better if you upload only the best stuff". Flagging, sometimes, is a detriment to that, and encourages that kind of slyness.

I don't think that this is true. Randeel received some flags lately, too.
But I think that flags should not distinguish about how a poat was uploaded. It's goal is something different. Good tagging can help that your posts get re-approved, though. See a feedback that was given by Bibs not so long ago. So off course it is frustrating if you receive multiple flags for your uploads, and especially if you searched for them. But how should this be treated? Putting such posts too higher scrutiny and lower the scrutiny for posts that was uploaded 5 seconds after they appeared on Pixiv? Probably not. But what is always a possibility is to contact a Janitor of your choice and ask if they cn specifically look over those posts. Off course don't demand that they should re-approve it, but directly asking for another Janitor's opinion will always help. That way, you also receive a more complex feedback than the flag reason.

Some posts deserve flagging, I agree. We'll always be privy to that. But as I said multiple times before, sometimes these flags are really, really petty. And you're almost one of the most offending approvers ticking on "post has poor quality" even though most other approvers reserve that for the worst of the worst. Like, what do you do that for? To rub it in? One somewhat critical mistake in anatomy when the rest of the post would have likely passed and it's "poor quality"? What's really poor quality then?

That sounds like a personal attack. Off course I am there when it comes to flagging, but I'm also in constant conversations with other Janitors about such posts. But also when it comes to (re-)approving posts. So I'm doing both things. One could say that this is a dictation from me and maybe those persons are not wrong, but regardless this thing: One probably shouldn't pin something to an user. I honestly think that flags are an additional review. Most of my "succesful" flagsdo have over 10 reviews, and I think I don't have to many re-approved posts (http://isshiki.donmai.us/user-reports/post_flags/%21CURRENT.html). The re-approved posts are maybe really to petty, like this sprite post. But again, if this would continue to an extent that is not bearable, then I'm sure the mods would mention that to me.
And one crucial mistake in anatomy is a flag reason. You don't have to use flags if you don't think that flags should be used like that. If there are reasons why a post should stay, then probably an appeal will help, and i can assure you that those appeals are liked by the Janitors. The more there is to read, the better for the post (or not, if unjustified).
But even if a post is re-approved: If the flag reason itself is logical and not vandalism (resolved flags can accumulate in vandalism, though), then the flag is justified. If the flag reason is respected is a whole different question. If the flag is offending, then it probably is vandalism, too.

So I hope I made my position a bit more clear about how I see flags. I've probably repeated myself over and over again, but my key point is that flags should be used on posts that deserve the flags. If the flag is respected, then it is going through and if not, then the flagger should think about the flag and change in the future: Just like users who accumulate to many deleted posts because of flags should probably be more careful about their uploads.

Provence said:

I don't think that this is true. Randeel received some flags lately, too.
But I think that flags should not distinguish about how a poat was uploaded. It's goal is something different. Good tagging can help that your posts get re-approved, though. See a feedback that was given by Bibs not so long ago. So off course it is frustrating if you receive multiple flags for your uploads, and especially if you searched for them. But how should this be treated? Putting such posts too higher scrutiny and lower the scrutiny for posts that was uploaded 5 seconds after they appeared on Pixiv? Probably not. But what is always a possibility is to contact a Janitor of your choice and ask if they cn specifically look over those posts. Off course don't demand that they should re-approve it, but directly asking for another Janitor's opinion will always help. That way, you also receive a more complex feedback than the flag reason.

Of course it isn't true. But the perception is. And sometimes that perception means more than the actual truth because it affects our mood and determination. There's no 'real' solution to it.

That sounds like a personal attack. Off course I am there when it comes to flagging, but I'm also in constant conversations with other Janitors about such posts. But also when it comes to (re-)approving posts. So I'm doing both things. One could say that this is a dictation from me and maybe those persons are not wrong, but regardless this thing: One probably shouldn't pin something to an user. I honestly think that flags are an additional review. Most of my "succesful" flagsdo have over 10 reviews, and I think I don't have to many re-approved posts (http://isshiki.donmai.us/user-reports/post_flags/%21CURRENT.html). The re-approved posts are maybe really to petty, like this sprite post. But again, if this would continue to an extent that is not bearable, then I'm sure the mods would mention that to me.
And one crucial mistake in anatomy is a flag reason. You don't have to use flags if you don't think that flags should be used like that. If there are reasons why a post should stay, then probably an appeal will help, and i can assure you that those appeals are liked by the Janitors. The more there is to read, the better for the post (or not, if unjustified).
But even if a post is re-approved: If the flag reason itself is logical and not vandalism (resolved flags can accumulate in vandalism, though), then the flag is justified. If the flag reason is respected is a whole different question. If the flag is offending, then it probably is vandalism, too.

Yeah, it is. If a post is bad enough quality, then I think the janitors get it. Heck, I think the "has poor quality" option for review versus no interest is an even worse option to have in the first place. It's almost implied in the first place, anyway, that if a post is just below the borderline then it will go bypassed. It appears to me that option exists posts that are very bad, but if you're going to use it on anything you just don't like, then all it is is an insult.

So I hope I made my position a bit more clear about how I see flags. I've probably repeated myself over and over again, but my key point is that flags should be used on posts that deserve the flags. If the flag is respected, then it is going through and if not, then the flagger should think about the flag and change in the future: Just like users who accumulate to many deleted posts because of flags should probably be more careful about their uploads.

I'm not disagreeing with that. I just think it sets a dangerous precedent because it sets the trend for other users to make even pickier flags on things. But if the flags are getting decent review, then whatever. I'd love to have less to do with the queue anyway, and if there's actual review then great. It appears it might have already died down anyway.

Well...perception is a nice argument. I can't say anything against it, since it is also some kind of knockout arguments. It is like using fears in political discussions: They are there, but there is something more to them and shouldn't be used as a main argument against something.

What do you mean with the second paragraph. Is this about the mod queue and how the options "No interest" and "Poor quality" are being used? If yes, then I'm using them to give users at least a bit feedback, since I think having more feedback is better than none. Just imagine a post gets deleted and it's written: The post was reviewed by 0 moderators"^^. The "poor quality" option is, in my eyes, an option to tell other Janitors that they should take a closer look at this picture before approving, There is most probably a reason why "Poor quality" was chosen. Likewise, it applies to the uploader, too. "Poor quality" means that the user should take a closer look at this specific picture.

No, no, the post do receive review and are constantly re-approved if needed.

Provence said:

Well...perception is a nice argument. I can't say anything against it, since it is also some kind of knockout arguments. It is like using fears in political discussions: They are there, but there is something more to them and shouldn't be used as a main argument against something.

This I can agree on.

What do you mean with the second paragraph. Is this about the mod queue and how the options "No interest" and "Poor quality" are being used? If yes, then I'm using them to give users at least a bit feedback, since I think having more feedback is better than none. Just imagine a post gets deleted and it's written: The post was reviewed by 0 moderators"^^. The "poor quality" option is, in my eyes, an option to tell other Janitors that they should take a closer look at this picture before approving, There is most probably a reason why "Poor quality" was chosen. Likewise, it applies to the uploader, too. "Poor quality" means that the user should take a closer look at this specific picture.

Yes. I think it's an awful option. "Feedback"? If users want useful feedback I think they would much rather a "write-in" review or a comment indicating such a thing than an option that basically amounts to "I think this sucks" because that's basically all it says. And "indicating that to other approvers" makes it even worse, because then there's an implicit bias that this post shouldn't be approved, even though I think the queue works best when approvers approve by their own merits.

Hmm, again perception, I think?
Well, consider this: If every mod would write a written feedback, then we probably sit here until tomorrow. It just is not possible and the amount of Janitors would decrease, because no one wants to do this.
Well, there is a topic, I think you know that, where you can ask for a specific opinion. You can also always contact a Janitor via DM. But don't expect an answer. Well, if I'm asked specifically to look over a post, then I (maybe not other Janitors) try to give a satisfying answer. But working with the queue that way on every post is not possible, unless you are a machine.
Giving no review is also bad, because then the Appeal topic would explode. So either way, we Janitors drew the shortest straw >:3.

I'm saying if it's bad enough it necessitates the option, then it's better to just write a comment in or something. From what I see, most approvers don't use it except a select few, and only for just plain bad posts.

That is probably right. That's why I'd encourage to use those options in the first place. But the moderation process is iffy to begin with. No matter how it's done, there is always a party that is screwed.
If a feedback "needs" to be written (there is "Detailed rejection"), then Janitors would spend way too many time.
If no feedback is given, then the Appeal topic will explode.
If too much feedback is given, then the user feels discouraged.
And the two last "ifs" are actually opposite to each other :/.

Feedback offered should just be proportional to how willing the user is on hearing that stuff, like on the upload feedback thread. If they want it, they'll get it. But even as it stands, that topic at some points feels like a second deletion appeals thread because some users just want to get their work looked at again without breaking any guidelines.

Sometimes the deletion appeals thread even sounds like a lazy gimmick since there's users that just mention "there's nothing wrong with this" rather than provide anything beneficial to the post's potential approval. And there's no reason to even call them out on it, but then they assume we're just not looking and/or we have subpar evaluation standards.

Coming back around on this topic due to some recent comments of mine (and in addition to being recently getting the permission), I'll say now that the "poor quality" option is maybe somewhat of a necessary evil. It's useful to just seed out the posts that are just blatantly bad enough that the original uploader wouldn't try to make a deletion appeal -- so it serves as a feedback in that manner. But the visibly worse an image is, the less the need for a detailed rejection for the image, in which case approvers can just click the option from the mod queue and get it over with.

And then there's the nagging feeling that it gets overused or is chosen mistakenly while approvers are sifting through the queue, which then, even if by mistake, corrobates that it just feels like an attack on the uploader or artist, against any one of us' better intentions to kindly decline an image that would likely not pass the queue anyway.

I suppose that all I can say is that it should be used with care, but then that's really only up to each and every one of the approvers looking into the queue.

I just noticed a whole spat of 'anatomy quality' flagging (17~18 hours ago of this comment) of several recent posts, which IMO are perfectly good otherwise.

Case in point:

artist #48992

Artists such as Mamuru were all fine until this new flagging wave started.

I thought the 'bad anatomy' tag was for questionable anatomy and deletion was reserved for grotesque and horrifically off anatomy.

This new trend in quality curating of posts, that are great in every other way, without regard for an artist's stylistic take on anatomy does not sit well with me.

What's most disappointing is that all these flagged posts have 100% moderators disliking them.
Who decided to implement this new standard and who decided what this standard is?

Are we going to start flagging posts for questionable shading, improbable clothing behaviour, impossible poses and unrealistic proportions?

I understand extremely bad cases of anatomy, but going straight for deletion instead of using tags for just slightly imperfect anatomy is too restrictive. One bad arm, or one breast too big and that axes the whole post even if 90% of the rest of it is okay. Correct if I am wrong, but deletion should be a last resort reserved for the worst cases of cases and not for slight imperfections.

This is art, not a study is of perfectly accurate body drawings.

Do we really have to re-start the whole discussion why flagging is an option for this page? I'm getting tired of it and it only creates a discussion that runs in circles.

Provence said:

Do we really have to re-start the whole discussion why flagging is an option for this page? I'm getting tired of it and it only creates a discussion that runs in circles.

I am not contesting the existence of the 'flagging' option.

I question whoever is going around mass flagging posts for not getting perfect anatomy, opting for outright deletion instead of using the 'bad anatomy' tag (which would probably not even stick).

Squishy said:

I am not contesting the existence of the 'flagging' option.

I question whoever is going around mass flagging posts for not getting perfect anatomy, opting for outright deletion instead of using the 'bad anatomy' tag (which would probably not even stick).

Yeah, that would be me. But what's the concern :P?

Provence said:

Yeah, that would be me. But what's the concern :P?

Mainly because I just noticed a crapload of images I was looking for are no longer there and recently discovered that most of them are gone because of being flagged for anatomy.

I'm stuck with 1 appeal a day, and meanwhile I can see a whole mass wave of nitpicky anatomy flags that are succeeding. A huge spike that had started about 30 days ago (at least the areas I usually browse). I have a hunch that it's the same person because of the writing style.

I probably can't appeal most of them, because the flagger is accurate with pointing out these imperfections and all the moderators agree with it, whilst ignoring the fact that it barely affects the whole image.

Something that barely affects the whole image for you may very well completely ruin the picture for someone else.

On the contrary, something that completely ruins the image for a single person shouldn't be the sole factor in deciding whether to keep an image or not. It's anime-style art, there's bound to be small mistakes in proportions, anatomy and the like but I think it's a matter of degree.

If you're an anatomy aficionado that gets bothered easily by incorrectness, then a ton of images will bother you, right. But on the other hand, if you're a casual user, perhaps not a whole lot. Approvers in the queue should find that 'right' balance between too gracious and too strict.