Posted under General
DetBarkhorn said:
Stop being dense. There's an infinite amount of flaggers and a handful of approvers; It is not some fair, democratic process by any stretch of the imagination.
Stop being aggressive.
And no, there is only a handful of flaggers.
Just look at this report:
http://isshiki.donmai.us/user-reports/post_flags/%21CURRENT.html
With the first four + Magical Asparagus in this list flagging mostly samples and/or screencaps. The Bot doesn't count, all succesful flags are running under this account afaik, too.
Xy flagged mostly their approvals, because of a hastily send feedback.
Don't know about wuv u, but the "great" flagging starts with @reiyasona .
And there you can see a good trend: We have over 1000 uploads each day and a good amount of them is always pending.
But this report is counting the flagging over a month (30 days). Only looking at this numbers, you can draw this conclusion: Theoretically, there is an inginite number of flaggers (every user), but only a handful is even using this user right (This is something that gets even misunderstood up to moderation rank).
It is very easy to see that some flags don't put much stress to the system, even when I flag 10 posts every day within 30 days; they still don't make out 5% of the daily approving process.
Also, when an image gets flagged and deleted succesfully (that's the condition), then one should always question if the uploader and the approver should be higher scrutinized, and NOT the other way round: That means not the original flagger nor the following flaggers should be higher scrutinized or be observed, because if an image gets deleted, then there was always a point in flagging.
DetBarkhorn said:
Then it's even worse if you can't understand that this carefully constructed balance of power can be tipped by someone having a handful of random accounts.
All the accounts in the world mean nothing if an admin decides to intervene and status-lock a post to shut down the sort of hypothetical coordinated event you seem to be describing, in which "infinite" flaggers keep flagging the same post until there are no approvers left. Emphasis on hypothetical here. Between this thread, topic #13113, topic #13712, and topic #13177, there has been a ton of discussion about flag usage in the last year, yet I'm not aware of a single instance in which this sort of intervention was deemed necessary.
As an aside, calling people "dense" and implying that they "can't understand" the situation isn't going to endear anyone to your side of the argument.
Edited the help:appeal_notice to include that the appeal reason should not contain an insult/attack towards the flagger (if flagged).
Provence said:
Edited the help:appeal_notice to include that the appeal reason should not contain an insult/attack towards the flagger (if flagged).
Not that I disagree but it seems rather abrupt and unilateral to make the change. What is the sudden necessity? Civility should go without saying, and it's not like other pages have or need a politeness reminder besides howto:comment.
Actually that page can use some help. The howto:flag page is robust but the appeal counterpart seems too bare. I plan on making some recommendations later on.
Squishy said:
Not that I disagree but it seems rather abrupt and unilateral to make the change. What is the sudden necessity? Civility should go without saying, and it's not like other pages have or need a politeness reminder besides howto:comment.
Actually that page can use some help. The howto:flag page is robust but the appeal counterpart seems too bare. I plan on making some recommendations later on.
You look here.
Looks like there is at least one appeal where this shines through. Howto:flag also mentions politeness, especially when responding to flags. So it only seems logical that the mention, that pops up when appealing posts give this reminder, too.
Nobody profits from aggressiveness.
Provence said:
You look here.
Looks like there is at least one appeal where this shines through. Howto:flag also mentions politeness, especially when responding to flags. So it only seems logical that the mention, that pops up when appealing posts give this reminder, too.
Nobody profits from aggressiveness.
So just one aggressive appeal in a few months triggered this?
The logic behind the reason is fine to me. I was worried there was a rash of insulting appeals just now.
Also i can see my appeals seem to form a fair portion, with dismal success. How embarrassing.
