Posted under General
Jarlath said:
I say do it. This is a bit of a trigger for me, and that's why I was against keeping tagme as a tag in the first place. It's too easy to abuse.
I only fear that this tag will be populized if we mention it in the upload page. I can imagine that a lot of users start using this tag then :/.
Provence said:
I only fear that this tag will be populized if we mention it in the upload page. I can imagine that a lot of users start using this tag then :/.
That's why I was in favour if removing it for a detail_request tag, and making sure we don't auto-alias it to tagme or having the Uploader Bookmarklet automatically using it instead of refusing to upload a picture below 3-5 tags the way it already does when you don't select a rating.
Beyond that, even just an addition to the "please tag your uploads" message to say "tagme is not a substitute for proper tagging - tag what you see"... and then discipling those who abuse it anyways.
Jarlath said:
That's why I was in favour if removing it for a detail_request tag, and making sure we don't auto-alias it to tagme or having the Uploader Bookmarklet automatically using it instead of refusing to upload a picture below 3-5 tags the way it already does when you don't select a rating.
Beyond that, even just an addition to the "please tag your uploads" message to say "tagme is not a substitute for proper tagging - tag what you see"... and then discipling those who abuse it anyways.
But just changing the name of the tag won't do that much if users see it to mean the same thing anyway. As for why I think such a detail_request tag wouldn't be that great is because then you'd have to know what the user's talking about, and they might have used it without indicating in the comments. It would simply diverge conversation between topic #12251 and the comments section of individual posts, most of which we don't want to go through if it isn't said out clear -- as I made small mention to in forum #124373.
tagme should be selectively used in posts that the user knows consciously that they're missing but can't likely put a finger on (maybe all of level 0-3 on the tagging checklist, clothing is especially difficult for some users to tag). The problem is not that it'll be popularized -- it's already greatly populated on a daily basis. We can start issuing neutral feedbacks, but there is no clear demerit or consequence for poor tagging aside from that. Limit their uploading quota? Maybe.
In any case, I'm for explicit mention of it. Make it a bit more strict, that tagme is not used for laziness. But the first concern, anyway, is if there is even any consequence for it as in the second paragraph.
Just my opinion on the matter.
I'm currently working at reducing gentags:<5 to 0 (it has something over 1k post left), so it should be done by the end of this week.
The problem I have with this are gentags:<5 banned_artist and gentags:<5 loli, since I can't edit them properly. Would be great if someone could help me out there :3.
Toskana said:
I'm currently working at reducing gentags:<5 to 0 (it has something over 1k post left), so it should be done by the end of this week.
The problem I have with this are gentags:<5 banned_artist and gentags:<5 loli, since I can't edit them properly. Would be great if someone could help me out there :3.
Hmm so someone took on basically the same project I was working through earlier this year. That had about 3500 excluding deleted* and no humans stuff left when I last went through it, which wasn't all that long ago, whereas now it's down to 1001.
Just to say, though, I think there are a few no humans posts that only have 4 valid general tags, so don't expect to get it actually down to zero. You could probably get everything left onto just one page, though.
I'll go through the banned artist ones. Don't particularly fancy the idea of staring at loli posts for ages.
*I assume you are excluding these as well, based on the figure you gave.
kuuderes_shadow said:
I'll go through the banned artist ones.
All gone.
kuuderes_shadow said:
All gone.
Thanks a lot :3. That leaves around 950 post under -status:deleted gentags:<5. With a bit determination, this can be done within the next 24 to 48 hours >:3.
I don't know if -status:deleted gentags: will be tackled, too. It is definitely on the "To-do"-list, but it's so much :-/.
Now down to just 4 things:
- a flash that won't load
- a stupidly short porn video that needs downloading to see
- a banned pic of circles that could technically be removed with an artist request tag but that would defy the point
- post #1827774
And yes there's likely to be a lot of things on just 5 or 6 gentags as when I started clearing these out I did a lot of tag scripting of commonly missed tags just to get the numbers left to deal with down to levels that didn't feel impossibly daunting (and then obviously once something hit 5 gentags it was no longer included), which probably accounts for about 8-10k or so of those things on 5 gentags.
Updated
kuuderes_shadow said:
Now down to just 4 things:
- a flash that won't load
- a stupidly short porn video that needs downloading to see
- a banned pic of circles that could technically be removed with an artist request tag but that would defy the point
- post #1827774And yes there's likely to be a lot of things on just 5 or 6 gentags as when I started clearing these out I did a lot of tag scripting of commonly missed tags just to get the numbers left to deal with down to levels that didn't feel impossibly daunting (and then obviously once something hit 5 gentags it was no longer included), which probably accounts for about 8-10k or so of those things on 5 gentags.
While going through all those loli posts with less than 5 gentags, I made it a habit to check the parent/child post if it existed and a lot of them only had 5 tags which I filled up with tags from the post I was there for. I have often noticed a lot of older parents/child posts that has low tag counts while the newer version is very well tagged which should be easy to fill up when uploading the new version but I guess people don't check that so often?
And now back up to 53.
Thanks @OMGkillitwithfire.
kuuderes_shadow said:
And now back up to 53.
Thanks @OMGkillitwithfire.
Wow, sorry for being away for a few hours I guess.
I was planning to tag them while I translate.
Regarding tagme and it's pretty sloppy usage I have added a new clause to its wiki some months ago.
This clause is against people who just add the the tag but without doing anything else on the post regarding gentags:
"Do also not use it when you find a badly tagged post. Instead, try to tag it as well as you can first. If you still think that tagme is needed afterwards, add it."
This is pretty easy to understand. If you can add tagme to a post then you can also add some gentags, too. The purpose is not that one person then goes through all posts tagged with tagme at once but we all have an interest in well tagged posts.
So it would be really nice if not only tagme is added but also some gentags, too. Because at the time when I go through these posts it the post could already be well tagged and that would reduce everyne's workload then ^-^.
Chiera said:
Regarding tagme and it's pretty sloppy usage I have added a new clause to its wiki some months ago.
This clause is against people who just add the the tag but without doing anything else on the post regarding gentags:"Do also not use it when you find a badly tagged post. Instead, try to tag it as well as you can first. If you still think that tagme is needed afterwards, add it."
This is pretty easy to understand. If you can add tagme to a post then you can also add some gentags, too. The purpose is not that one person then goes through all posts tagged with tagme at once but we all have an interest in well tagged posts.
So it would be really nice if not only tagme is added but also some gentags, too. Because at the time when I go through these posts it the post could already be well tagged and that would reduce everyne's workload then ^-^.
Theoretically, this is not too bad of an idea. Let's see how it goes.
ion288 said:
I have come across posts where I thought "there has gotta be more tags that apply" but where unable to think of any. Is that not the purpose of tagme?
That's the purpose of tagme, but you also have to have something in mind and this probably counts for posts that are well tagged to begin with
I also highly suggest topic #12251.
Chiera said:
Regarding tagme and it's pretty sloppy usage I have added a new clause to its wiki some months ago.
This clause is against people who just add the the tag but without doing anything else on the post regarding gentags:"Do also not use it when you find a badly tagged post. Instead, try to tag it as well as you can first. If you still think that tagme is needed afterwards, add it."
This is pretty easy to understand. If you can add tagme to a post then you can also add some gentags, too. The purpose is not that one person then goes through all posts tagged with tagme at once but we all have an interest in well tagged posts.
So it would be really nice if not only tagme is added but also some gentags, too. Because at the time when I go through these posts it the post could already be well tagged and that would reduce everyne's workload then ^-^.
So, then what happens when we find a poorly tagged post? Simply leave it? Because here's my thought process, and this goes the same for a handful of other users:
If we see a poorly tagged post, and we go "wow that's pretty badly tagged despite this image being so information-rich", yet we don't have the time, energy, and blood to sacrifice tagging it, then here are our options:
I see (2) as much more problematic as (1). You let this go on for long enough, and let's see:
-status:deleted gentags:<10 age:..1month: 415
Given, some of these can't be tagged any better than they are already. However, there are a handful of outliers I can spot on the first few pages that I could easily bump to 25+ tags had I cared about them.
Nobody monitors these as often as they should. There is some content that remains difficult to find out of undue action and lack of diligence from the original uploader. And yet tagme, as per its use on literally every other imageboard, is the tag used to pool these images somewhere for some gardeners to tag. Where then, would they find what else to tag? Do we make these searches recommended in that tag wiki? How do they even know about this knowledge now if they don't watch the wiki or tag edits?
This change has happened with little to no input (given I've only seen one reply bumping support for it), and as such I disagree with its nature. I would withhold slipping in clauses that describe a potentially unwanted change, especially if that makes it more difficult for users such as myself to "mark" posts that need better effort put in.
Or come up with an alternate tag that better distinguishes the use you intend it to have.
EDIT: More importantly this doesn't solve the original problem of reducing bad tagging, it just shoves responsibility onto someone else -- in this case the viewer. That it is their lack of diligence that is the problem with the proliferation of this tag, not ourselves.
Most non-contributors aren't great taggers. And if they are, they haven't cared to put enough effort in. This is given, since there's little to no incentive to do so when one could always default the excuse "I don't know any better." The problem has always been encouraging users to be diligent (in addition to making the gallery easier to search), not trying to rally users to do someone else's job. Inevitably they do, but they receive near to no credit for that kind of work.
Updated
