Akiraka8 said:
...even if it just means linking users with similar taste...
Posted under General
This topic has been locked.
Akiraka8 said:
...even if it just means linking users with similar taste...
Akiraka8 is right.
Maybe taking scores away isn't that helpful, too. But instead of taking stuff away from users we should consider that we give stuff to users that want to contribute: Making it easier to contribute. Being more beginner friendly, rewarding good uploading behavior for "limited uploads" user better, make it more clear what you can do as a new user.
How are scores actually essential? I don't really see the point of them.
I see the point in user names, though. People want their name of the stuff they contribute to the site.
To be honest, this whole discussion is shifting towards what is happening during rush when it comes to usernames. The arguments are that uploading is nothing more than clicking "Submit" and the post is there and you snipe other people.
But how will people get credit if they go for a post hunt for forgotten posts? It seems wrong to me to not credit the user as uploader but "only" as tagger for that post.
And Danbooru's problem is more that new users apparantly aren't attracted to the site and they have to fight for it. What I mean with "easier to contribute" is that we might want to make the moderation process more lax: Promoting user earlier, upload slots should be gained back as soon as possible (like in the old system. A mix of the current and the old one would work perfectly without polluting quality at all).
I think we shouldn't lok from a Sniper's perspective but from a Member's perspective and the moderation process it very frustrating right now. It takes extremely long to be noticed and you can't really upload that much but only in pieces. Basically, I think we are searching for the wrong cause if we look at "prolific uploaders".
Provence said:
How are scores actually essential? I don't really see the point of them.
This should be obvious really. Popular pages are based on those, some reports are based on those, they serve as a quick method to judge image reception, people use order:score all the time, etc, etc. I don't care if some people use them for something stupid like measuring their e-peen, the scores should stay.
Type-kun said:
Making it easier to contribute is always a good idea, but it doesn't solve the problem we have at hand here, because people causing it already HAVE every instrument of contribution Danbooru has to offer and even more.
Not to repeat myself too much, but I just think this is a matter of Zipf's Law. There will always be a small, hyper-productive group of users on any website where user-generated content is involved. Look at it as a universal law of the internet and try to work with it.
To that end, I wouldn't say that prolific uploaders are causing a problem. They are doing exactly what they should be doing by uploading a lot of high quality art that the community appreciates. The people complaining about those uploaders aren't necessarily causing a problem either. They're just reporting on their situation and showing that they want to do more.
I like that the idea of getting noticed was brought up because I think more users just need a wider variety of opportunities to get noticed and be rewarded. The focus of this whole discussion seems to be limited to two facets of this site, upload count and score. But Danbooru is a lot more complex than that. Open up more productive niches and people will have fewer and fewer excuses to complain that they're being left behind. You'll have multiple Zipf curves of advancement instead of this single, already saturated one. You guys have a fun database here. Open it up and see what you can bring people in on.
Type-kun said:
This should be obvious really. Popular pages are based on those, some reports are based on those, they serve as a quick method to judge image reception, people use order:score all the time, etc, etc. I don't care if some people use them for something stupid like measuring their e-peen, the scores should stay.
But this is exactly the problem that is discussed.
Hide the numbers only, the rest can stay like it always did. But numbers themselves are creating a race that will end toxic if multiple prolific users are competing.
Provence said:
But this is exactly the problem that is discussed.
Hide the numbers only, the rest can stay like it always did. But numbers themselves are creating a race that will end toxic if multiple prolific users are competing.
If you remove scores, people will compete for the favcount, or for getting into the Curated pool. I don't think removing useful stats is a good way to approach the problem, as it just moves the problem to a different area rather than solving it.
nonamethanks said:
If you remove scores, people will compete for the favcount, or for getting into the Curated pool. I don't think removing useful stats is a good way to approach the problem, as it just moves the problem to a different area rather than solving it.
Hiding the score would also have other benefits.
You know that people keep saying that the score should have nothing to do with flagging or approving a post? But then people are using exactly this as reason when appealing a post or approving them. It is pretty hindering in judging a post's merits.
Provence said:
Hiding the score would also have other benefits.
You know that people keep saying that the score should have nothing to do with flagging or approving a post? But then people are using exactly this as reason when appealing a post or approving them. It is pretty hindering in judging a post's merits.
That's a fault of whoever's approving, rather than the score. But on that point I agree with you. Maybe hide the score when a post is flagged?
Based on the discussion here, I think these are the changes I'll pursue:
albert said:
- Hide the uploader information . Search will still be supported.
Why remove one of the incentives for uploading? Edit: didn't read correctly the most valuable updater part. But still:
Not only would this make it harder to notice for approvers and builders in general who is uploading bad posts (we had one example this week of an user only uploading unmarked duplicates and low quality scans), especially in the case of new users; this would also make it impossible for users like me who want to help new users, to get in contact with people who don't know how to set correct sources or don't set them at all, or are unknowingly committing mistakes in their uploads. I hope there'll still be a immediate way to check who uploaded what.
Also I'm not sure I'd still continue tagging random posts if I knew my name would end up on them without an input on my part. In fact there's plenty of posts that I certainly don't want immediately associated with my account but that I've still tagged for the sake of the archive. Would the only solution in that case be to delete my account?
Updated
This causes way too much detours.
If we have new uploaders then we have to frequently check who uploads what and have to givem them possible advice. New users are higher likely to go unnoticed with that.
Now you could say that the uploader's name should be present when the post is still in the mod queue pending. But what good does this achieve? The uploader will be down after Approval and in the worst case the most "valuable" updater isn't the true uploader but a tag gardener. This sounds like demotivation only, especially for new users who aren't that familiar with tagging.
On top of that you have to search if you are interested how an user is doing after their stuff is approved, but you have to remember their names and more people will be missed for promotion.
I know that "valuable" is also only semantics, but every user is equally valuable. Be it for tagging or uploading the post. Without the upload there wouldn't be any "valuable updater" in the first place.
I smell a big dissatisfaction between users since even if you made the first step you don't get credited at all. I see no point in punishing the uploader if someone else is there. I suggest making both visible: Uploader and Tagger. That way you don't scare away people, at least not to such an extent. As a side effect new people notice who updated their uploads and miht start asking how to improve and stuff like this.
In the end, tag vandalism is a big thing. I think more %fluff" tags will be added: Nude with bare shoulders/legs/arms/back, tied up with bondage, facing viewer with looking at viewer. It will be a competition of tags then and whose tags are more correct. This has already lead to edit wars between users because one was more convinced about his ideas. It's pretty much what iridescent slime said on page 2 or 3.
albert said:
Based on the discussion here, I think these are the changes I'll pursue:
- Hide the uploader information . Search will still be supported.
- Add a field for Most Valuable Updater (name pending). Initially this will just be the most frequent tag updater, but later it can be modified to factor in the uploader, noters, wiki updaters, etc.
- Eliminate the 1 week grace period for uploads. Maybe this will cause a burst of bad uploads, but IMO the system for clamping down on bad uploaders works and I agree that the barriers to entry should be lowered.
Will the uploader name still be visible in the tag history on each post like it is right now?
Not sure how I feel about the last point though, it feels like it will lead to more bad shit as mentioned.
albert said:
Based on the discussion here, I think these are the changes I'll pursue:
- Hide the uploader information . Search will still be supported.
- Add a field for Most Valuable Updater (name pending). Initially this will just be the most frequent tag updater, but later it can be modified to factor in the uploader, noters, wiki updaters, etc.
- Eliminate the 1 week grace period for uploads. Maybe this will cause a burst of bad uploads, but IMO the system for clamping down on bad uploaders works and I agree that the barriers to entry should be lowered.
Actually, this was the solution I was hoping for. I'm still in the middle of my little writeup (and my motivation to finish it has already dipped), but this is what I can summarize from what I've observed.
So, then, if you want to lower the barrier to upload, then make it so that anyone can upload, even if they don't know anything about tagging. Ease them into the system without criticizing them or giving them hard-to-find information.
Trivialize uploading. Incentivize tagging. That's the system we should be going with. Why? Because we need to diffuse responsibility across users that only want to do a certain task.
That's the purpose of point 2, to provide incentive for some user to contribute to a post. Sadly this isn't a utopia where people have enough time to freely contribute to everything they like (and even stuff they don't like), so indeed there needs to be an incentive if it isn't "put my name on this upload first."
So this was what I was thinking. Define fields for contributions that actually matter and aren't trivial. Here are my propositions:
Tagger: TaggerPerson. From the data we have in a post's edits record, whoever tagged a post the most accurately deserves their name here. This is how I imagine it works:Translator: TranslatorPerson. This is honestly a tougher problem (as some users copy notes as do others with tags; 1upping), but it should be here too to incentivize translation.Commentary: CommentaryPerson. Same deal as above, save for the fact that some commentary already comes translated, so it's just helpful to provide anyway. May deserve a field, may not.I would also prefer to change the meta search phrase of whoever upped a post to something more neutral. Change it, for example, from user:Mikaeri to submitter:Mikaeri or finder:Mikaeri. Technically anyone who is a "user" of the post has made any sort of contribution to it (whether it's tags, translations, notable comments, or commentary), so I want things to reflect that as the phrase "user" is rather generic.
And why I think we need a "soft" grace period instead of a harsh one -- This is to provide taggers (or other users) with the incentive to "steal credit" from people who mintag and then leave their posts untagged (or not tagged well). This is the incentive that we should provide -- that we don't value just having a post (as having a post uploaded is the most trivial thing to do on the site), but we also value it even more when it's well tagged.
My gripe with the current system is that it rewards users too easily for shitty habits (when it isn't even a reward, you don't get paid for this or anything). You can't tackle hiding post scores or favorites either, as those are integral to features of the site and a lot of users rely on them to find new content.
The uploader name is ultimately trivial because users should treat their posts as if they hadn't uploaded them -- posts submitted here ultimately belong to the gallery. The only reason to have an uploader name is when a post is pending (so we know a user isn't just submitting poor quality day in and day out).
So then, what are the ramifications of that?
Well, the reason there may need to be a "soft" grace period is so that the gallery can catch up with posts that aren't tagged. But users like myself who have huge (and I mean fucking huge) backlogs don't want to spend hours upon hours trying to work their way through it because they have to tag -- there are users out there that want to tag and potentially "credit steal" from users who don't care about that stuff.
I'm one of them, and a lot of users I know know this but I dump my backlog regularly in my chat server just so I can get shit out of the way without thinking about it. But I hate waiting for something to be up -- sometimes it's never up because such a post is bad id'd without anyone else looking. This has happened to me on a number of batches and I'd hate to see it happen to anyone else, to know that we're losing good quality posts just because we have these immaculate restrictions.
And once again, this lowers the barrier of entry. You will start to find those users who are contributing posts that are incredibly difficult to find (whether it be Weibo, Plurk, or some other less well-known community), that don't care about having their name on things, just that it's there so other people can find it (and even tag it for them).
Not to mention, it makes uploading comics so much fucking better. Comics are an incredible pain in the ass to tag -- there have been many series I've wanted to translate but eventually abandoned because I did not want to put up with tagging them.
So to summarize.
In my eyes, this is a positive change that will make it better for everyone. People know about my contributions to the site, but one thing I've always regretted was how nothing would change if this didn't go through. No matter how many howto pages I write/rewrite (howto:pixiv, howto:nicoseiga, etc) or how many writeups and guides I do, you can't change a system that ultimately rewards the laziest user in the whole of the ecosystem. Pushing so much responsibility onto them, too, is what will always make Danbooru by the elites, for the elites -- the elites being us. People who know too much about how to exploit the system by mintagging or pretagging and the like, how to upload things the fastest even though we should all be helping to make the gallery better.
If you want to attract other uploaders back like myself, perhaps this is the best way of going about things. Because right now, my interest in the site has dipped into the abyss.
EDIT: There are a lot more problems I find with the site than just this one, but this is one of the biggest and I'd like to see it out of the way ASAP. I don't know if it's worth finishing my write-up anymore (as it's past 10,000 characters on markdown, ugh), but I do find it somewhat valuable, because I'm still in the middle of my own "Mikabooru" side project for my own satisfactory ends -- writing these thoughts down will still be useful.
Updated
albert said:
Based on the discussion here, I think these are the changes I'll pursue:
- Hide the uploader information . Search will still be supported.
- Add a field for Most Valuable Updater (name pending). Initially this will just be the most frequent tag updater, but later it can be modified to factor in the uploader, noters, wiki updaters, etc.
- Eliminate the 1 week grace period for uploads. Maybe this will cause a burst of bad uploads, but IMO the system for clamping down on bad uploaders works and I agree that the barriers to entry should be lowered.
At this point, you're creating problems where none exist. As I mentioned previously, prolific uploaders are only a problem to the lazy and unmotivated who can't be bothered to find undocumented or uncleaned artists. I have a cache of over 1000 artists to clean that I've been continuously adding to for the past 3 months, so it's obviously not hard to find quality art that hasn't been posted. As for these changes, I find all of them to be rather bad ideas.
albert said:
- Hide the uploader information . Search will still be supported.
How are we supposed to search for a post using the uploader name if the uploader name is obfuscated? Do we have to go out of our way to the first log under tag history? This is very inconvenient and counter-intuitive to the entire system of browsing by uploader name when trying to find posts using the uploader name, much less finding out people who are uploading bad posts or posts against the ToS.
albert said:
- Add a field for Most Valuable Updater (name pending). Initially this will just be the most frequent tag updater, but later it can be modified to factor in the uploader, noters, wiki updaters, etc.
Instead of post sniping wars, now we'll just have tag sniping wars where people pretag posts, wait for them to be uploaded by another user, then tag snipe as soon as they see them posted. People will obsess over uploading revisions in order to gain an easy spotlight on their name for tagging. It'll be like upload sniping, but somehow even more unintelligent.
In addition, I think that taggers and translators are already appreciated enough. The person with the most positive feedbacks on this website is a translator, so you can't say that their hard work goes unnoticed.
albert said:
- Eliminate the 1 week grace period for uploads. Maybe this will cause a burst of bad uploads, but IMO the system for clamping down on bad uploaders works and I agree that the barriers to entry should be lowered.
It's already easy enough to troll on danbooru, as shown by the constant spambot bans and the spambot invasion from a few months ago. Doing this along with obfuscating uploader names is just like putting a huge sign up on the home page saying "Please come and troll on this website." You are essentially just begging people to come to this website for the sole purpose of ruining it. It won't just cause one single burst of bad uploads, but rather constant bursts of bad uploads until people have to be IP banned.
To sum up this post: Don't do this. Any of this. Please.
Updated
Mikaeri said:
Actually, this was the solution I was hoping for. I'm still in the middle of my little writeup (and my motivation to finish it has already dipped), but this is what I can summarize from what I've observed.
- Uploading (mind you, not tagging) is an extremely trivial thing. Very little of us are the original provider of such an image, and yet the credit still ultimately rests with them.
- Tagging is the thing that makes people either not want to up or are too scared to (as it's admittedly a pain in the ass and people think it's hard to learn -- it is)
This is wrong. Uploading is not trivial at all. It may only be a short click on the "Submit" button, but you first have to upload a post before you can even tag it. There are many long forgotten posts. Without the person bringing the upload to the page the post would not be here. No amount of tagging can help you with this. The first person who brings something to the site should always be recognized.
But here is where I think your misconception is starting: Uploaders do rarely get credit. Why? Because people care about the tags, too. Only in rare cases the uploader is credited: This has happened once with RaisingK because he uploaded some furry posts and Chinatsu just recently. Both are user who have never really participated in the Pixiv and this is what it ultimately is about.
So, then, if you want to lower the barrier to upload, then make it so that anyone can upload, even if they don't know anything about tagging. Ease them into the system without criticizing them or giving them hard-to-find information.
Tagging is NOT difficult to learn. You see some tags on the upload page. You can use "Similar" tags on thw upload page if you want to know more tags. You can look how others are tagging and you can ask the persons who tagged their uploads in a certain way and you can easily give advice to new users if you see how they are tagging their uploads. What we need more is a better howto:tag section, but hiding the username doesn't do anything good.
Especially because of one thing that I will mention later.
Trivialize uploading. Incentivize tagging. That's the system we should be going with. Why? Because we need to diffuse responsibility across users that only want to do a certain task.
- Uploaders just want to upload. If they don't care about their name on it, then just let them be. Don't "force" them into tagging if someone else wants to do it. If a post isn't tagged within a week (I talk about the grace period below), then let them nicely through DanbooruBot or something. Provide a search like user:Mikaeri -tagger:Mikaeri and say "Hey! We appreciate the uploads, but it would also be nice if you knew how to tag. Please take a look at some of the posts users other than you provided on posts you submitted: post #xxxx, etc"
- Taggers just want to tag. If a post is hard to find, they make it easier to find and the system should reward them for it. In fact, let them steal credit from other users if they're an extremely fast and accurate tagger (or have tags copypasta'd).
- Translators just want to translate. Translators don't want to go through the hoops of learning how to tag when they're not good at it, and uploading is trivial enough for them to know how to work.
This isn't diffusing responsibility. This is saying that I don't have to tag my post and that someone else should do it. But what will happen after one week has passed and many posts are just above the 10 tag mark as it's currently suggested? Taggers mostly only add one or two tags. They don't tag a full history of tags and only a handful is doing this.
Besides, you seem to forget that not everyone want to have their name besides a badly tagged 3rd party edit or a bdsm, sex or whatever kinky post. Taggers may want to tag stuff but they don't essentially want their name on every nude filter.
That's the purpose of point 2, to provide incentive for some user to contribute to a post. Sadly this isn't a utopia where people have enough time to freely contribute to everything they like (and even stuff they don't like), so indeed there needs to be an incentive if it isn't "put my name on this upload first."
So this was what I was thinking. Define fields for contributions that actually matter and aren't trivial. Here are my propositions:
Tagger: TaggerPerson. From the data we have in a post's edits record, whoever tagged a post the most accurately deserves their name here. This is how I imagine it works:
- For every general tag that's green (this tag has not been removed, so is currently accepted to be accurate), attribute +1 to the user who contributed it.
- For every general tag that's red (a tag was deemed inaccurate), attribute +1 to the user who made the tag removal.
- For every general tag that's dark green (this tag has been removed, so is not accepted to be accurate), attribute -1 to the user who contributed it.
- Whoever has the most points attributed to them gets their name in that field. Make this field searchable e.g. tagger:Mikaeri.
- One thing to note however: This doesn't solve the problem of 1upping users (and so Twitter/Pawoo curators will continue to suffer in particular), nor will it solve the problem of pretagging (which isn't so much a negative as much as it is just a side effect of not wanting to be 1upped).
Translator: TranslatorPerson. This is honestly a tougher problem (as some users copy notes as do others with tags; 1upping), but it should be here too to incentivize translation.Commentary: CommentaryPerson. Same deal as above, save for the fact that some commentary already comes translated, so it's just helpful to provide anyway. May deserve a field, may not.
As you said: It doesn't solve the problem of 1upping. In the end you are just taking the tags from the Twitter upload and because the Twitter upload is of less quality it will become the Child post. The original tagger gets forgotten by most people. That's not how "Credit" should look like.
I would also prefer to change the meta search phrase of whoever upped a post to something more neutral. Change it, for example, from user:Mikaeri to submitter:Mikaeri or finder:Mikaeri. Technically anyone who is a "user" of the post has made any sort of contribution to it (whether it's tags, translations, notable comments, or commentary), so I want things to reflect that as the phrase "user" is rather generic.
This has pretty muh nothing to do with this topic, but this sounds much fairer, yes.
And why I think we need a "soft" grace period instead of a harsh one -- This is to provide taggers (or other users) with the incentive to "steal credit" from people who mintag and then leave their posts untagged (or not tagged well). This is the incentive that we should provide -- that we don't value just having a post (as having a post uploaded is the most trivial thing to do on the site), but we also value it even more when it's well tagged.
My gripe with the current system is that it rewards users too easily for shitty habits (when it isn't even a reward, you don't get paid for this or anything). You can't tackle hiding post scores or favorites as those are integral to features of the site and a lot of users rely on them to find new content.
The uploader name is ultimately trivial because users should treat their posts as if they hadn't uploaded them -- posts submitted here ultimately belong to the gallery. The only reason to have an uploader name is when a post is pending (so we know a user isn't just submitting poor quality day in and day out).
Of course we value good tagging. Why do you think more people get feedbacks because of tagging than because of uploading? This is exactly why. Tagging requires much more work and time and people are already noticing this.
And we don't get paid for that stuff but we also don't need to. Danbooru is just a hobby and everyone who contributes something should be actively associated with a post. Be it something "small" like sniping a post during rush or be it because of tagging, translating or pooling a post.
And why should we treat uploads as we have not uploaded them? You are pretty much saying that we could as well make an upload bot then.
And here I get to my biggest concern, actually: Pending posts and that the user name is only shown there. If you let the uploader's name be shown to the people uploading the stuff while a post is pending I wonder if you have ever thought what might happen when a post gets approved. Then the uploader name will be replaced by the tagger. Because new user are still learning tags that means that sometimes this credit will be stolen. This is ultimately extremely demotivating if they are first happy to see their name on the post but after the post is accepted they are no longer associated with the post but only with detours.
So then, what are the ramifications of that?
Well, the reason there needs to be a grace period is so that the gallery can catch up with posts that aren't tagged. Users like myself who have huge (and I mean fucking huge) backlogs don't want to spend hours upon hours trying to work their way through it because they have to tag -- there are users out there that want to tag and potentially "credit steal" from users who don't care about that stuff.
I'm one of them, and a lot of users I know know this but I dump my backlog regularly in my chat server just so I can get shit out of the way without thinking about it. But I hate waiting for something to be up -- sometimes it's never up because such a post is bad id'd without anyone else looking. This has happened to me on a number of batches and I'd hate to see it happen to anyone else, to know that we're losing good quality posts just because we have these immaculate restrictions.
You want a well-tagged gallery, right? Good, then what good does it to let Taggers tag the amount of post you are providing? The simple amount of posts will do nothing good in the end. You should back off the idea that we can erase our backlog when we want to have well-tagged posts in my opinion. The backlog will always get bigger and the danger is that the post will be always a bit undertagged.
What you are suggesting is pretty much tagme 2.0. And I can tell you that tagme was and still is an evergrowing tag until someone and mostly one person took care of it. You might say that taggers want to tag stuff but the mere amount will end in many untagged post (see translation request for the Translator site (btw Translators are getting the biggest credit on this site (Paracite, Moonspeaker)). They can't catch up with this amount.
And once again, this lowers the barrier of entry. You will start to find those users who are contributing posts that are incredibly difficult to find (whether it be Weibo, Plurk, or some other less well-known community), that don't care about having their name on things, just that it's there so other people can find it (and even tag it for them).
Not to mention, it makes uploading comics so much fucking better. Comics are an incredible pain in the ass to tag -- there have been many series I've wanted to translate but eventually abandoned because I did not want to put up with tagging them.
This won't really lower the entry beause your name is still there when you upload and the post is pending. Some think they aren't responsible then but some want to show their "talent" and tag their stuff, even if it's only a little in the beginning. I already mentioned the danger of taking the name away above.
What we need more is to make the mderation process less tedious:
-Lowering the amount of post t get unlimited uploads
-Less restrictions, especially in the first months. Give one upload slot back for every approval. The rest can stay as it is.
-Lowering the threshld of deletion confidence. @NWF_Renim told me that this threshold lies by 5%. But users like nanami, Rignak, SciFi (all three are long time users) are well below this threshold according to the reports.
The start of Danbooru is the most frustrating thing. Surely it doesn't help that one user takes all the Touhou uploads, but these users don't even have the possibility to compete when all their stuff is approved but they still have to wait 23 hours for the nex uploads. Of course they are going to miss a lot posts and this is what ultimately is the most frustrating thing. Not the responsibility to tag.
(Btw. open up the upload gate from the start is wrong. My argument wasn't to do that. My suggestion was to make clear before signing up that there is this restriction. But you only get to know this after signing up.
How are going to count two very big concerns:
-Not every tagger wants to have their name on something. Your argumentation strongly relies n the fact that "Taggers want to tag". This is of course true, but that doesn't mean that their name is actively shown as "most valuable updater". I for example don't want to be the first person being associated with post #2980008 because I added all tags to the upload. It should be the uploader but it's not for giving them credit. It's in this case for giving advice to not upload the post. Some people might not be aware of the post change history on the upload and they might ping me because they see my name. I don't think that's very helpful.
-Tags are already pretty obscure. If we want to encourage users to tag more than before then it will lead to bad edits and ultimately more work. But because there will be more tagging work for everyone how should the mistags be noticed? It is already slow and this seems to slow down the tagging system even more.
-This will also end to tagging wars (it already has happened between us two as well and in the end the mods said it could always go both ways). If we are rewarding the removal of tags (marked red) then there might be people who don't agree with that and much more than before.
Updated
wuv_u said:
How are we supposed to search for a post using the uploader name if the uploader name is obfuscated? Do we have to go out of our way to the first log under tag history? This is very inconvenient and counter-intuitive to the entire system of browsing by uploader name when trying to find posts using the uploader name, much less finding out people who are uploading bad posts or posts against the ToS.
I agree completely with this. This just feels like it's going to create headaches for what very likely isn't going to solve the original problem much at all. Are we going to get better uploads, in both quantity and quality, out of this? I highly doubt in either case. In the latter case particularly, it lessens the ability to find and promote people who upload consistently good posts while also letting those who do the opposite avoid scrutiny.