The Problem with Prolific Uploaders

In response to forum #141761 and similar concerns (as I've said in forum #141724)... It is pretty easy to provide an opt-out option for users who don't want to be credited.

I think users in this thread are too focused thinking about small hindrances. Again, I won't go over the smaller details, but I do think it is extremely naive to just come up with an alternate solution just so it continues to let us have our place in the uploading ecosystem.

If you want to think about solving a problem, think about the end result first. Don't go about trying to create some alternate patch-up solution that you think will work, because either it won't, or it'll only work temporarily at best.

The only way to make this site better, to leave this site a better place than you came in, is to take yourself out of the equation. That's what I've done for many of my contributions. What, by far, objectively will create a situation where more people want to contribute instead of less?

Think about where you want the site to be for which kind of user here. Think about different perspectives. If you aren't, stop thinking about yourselves so much. Literally none of my friends outside of this site remotely care about uploader names, yet the importance of uploader names is repeated ad nauseum only by other uploaders who feel like they need their special place on every single post on the site. Things continue like this, eventually you only go down to like three users who upload more than half of the content the majority of users come here to upvote and favorite. If you want things to continue this route, then there are more fitting places.

Just observing this discussion, it seems to me that albert isn't interested in having the site grow this way. Everyone who cares about art, outside of whoever wants to ignore it, notices these changes. That only a few users up the majority of the content, and compared to previous years there is less content being uploaded in general because of this blatant monopoly, despite the fact that there are numerous artists continuing to get better and share more high quality content every year.

And I realized this a bit late: I was part of the problem. For anyone who knows what I've done on the site even remotely, they'll know that earlier on I did create a small 'clique' of users I highly preferred over others, spoiling them and even helping them get promoted in the process, not realizing that this was counterproductive to my goal of making the site for everyone that wants to contribute. I value the feedback I get, but I came to realize that this isn't the way I wanted to continue doing things.

I'll try to respond to a few of the complaints I see.

• There is very little problem with the way the upload restrictions work right now because a handful of users still upload a LOT less than their limit allows them to. You get roughly 40-50 posts everyday if you're a reliable user that knows where to find content and knows which approvers to please. In fact, if you have difficulty reaching this limit, I recommend you join my discord server and I will give you all the content you might desire as long as you source it correctly and tag it well. But as I'm aware, practically none of the member-level users come that close to the theoretical 1500 uploads per month cap.
• This isn't a problem with the approver system. As far as I'm concerned, if you want to notice good users who curate good content, then letting this sort of "elite" system continue to run rampant is counterproductive to that. I've written about this in my writeup, but it basically boils down to this: Elites already know the best tips for seeing the best art the "fastest". To win against them, you have to use the same strategy; fight fire with fire. It always comes down to whoever's faster, luckier, or most importantly -- employs shittier strategies. You can't just make that your basis of approval, because then you don't recognize the users that are always losing that fight. That doesn't make them bad uploaders; that just means you're indirectly promoting a shit method of uploading (mintags, filler tags, and other bullshit to cover it up).
• User feedback isn't the single basis for a feel-good mechanic, nor is it even that integral of one. If that were so, you'd imagine a lot more people would be tossing them left and right, but they don't. Only a small subset of users do this, and it's largely because either they genuinely appreciate good contributions or just want to get on others' good side. I imagine there are some users right now who, instead of having a positive user feedback, would prefer their name on a number of their top-scoring favorited posts instead.

Just as an aside to the last point: While I value the feedback I get (and I have a lot of positive feedback, I'll admit), it is really just a side note to me. Because while I would be happy if you issued me a positive, I'd appreciate it even more if you continued to contribute to the site in a proper manner so as to let me continue to be lazy. I also submit positive feedback sparingly; if you see me give you a positive, then I want you to treasure it. And to me, being a good user is a lot more than just uploading and tagging fast.

"Overwhelming opposition" is kind of a moot point since looking at this conversation, again, only the users who are interested in keeping their names on things are against this change with a few exceptions. Even CodeKyuubi is for creating a nameless system in forum #141415 and he's one of the best uploaders on this site. Someone with his skill in uploading, if they ever had a change of heart, could basically be the new Schrobby -- they'd have their name on like half of everything in the first page of order:rank.

I don't know if I'll finish my write-up (as it's gone to the point of being a little overbearing), but I do sympathize with a lot of the former and retired uploaders here (including many that aren't in this thread). If I did finish, perhaps all these points would be considerably better fleshed out and users (especially new and upcoming ones) would agree with this change for the better.

I'll end it with this, and this is what I've learned from contributing to wiki communities and open-source projects: It is always easy to lose contributors, whether by forcing their motivation through the gutter or putting pressure on them to perform to better (and slightly unrealistic) standards. But it is terribly difficult to attract new ones. So for every contributor you get, value them. Create a system that values their time and contributions, rather than one that basically spits on them at every coming moment.

Provence said:

Would you at least answer the question why you don't want to loosen up the moderation process which is the biggest reasn for newcomers to eventually quit again? You have said once that the time zone is a big reason against making the "one approval = one free slot again" policy a thing. But the truth is that there are a lot of Approvers from the US and from Europe and some are from Asia. How does "time zone" still work as a reason if you have over 90 Approvers?

There might be over 90 approvers (are there really?), but many of them are only infrequent approvers, while others won't touch certain types of content. 51 of my last 100 approved uploads were approved by one person and 80 were approved by just 5. Many individual image types have a 90+% chance of being approved by only 4 or 5 people. If I upload at a bad time for those people I end up waiting a lot longer than if one of them was browsing the mod queue when I uploaded.

Of course, this is a lot better than it was even when Albert made the post before, but it wouldn't take much to send it back there again.

Provence said:

What good is it when users don't want this recognition right next to a post? This is the biggest question that is still left unanswered.

It seems that the users who don't want their names rigth next to a post are part of the more experienced ones, for whatever reason.
I think this should be optional. Both actually: uploader and MVT.

Obviously this info should be visible to higher ranks for reasons in previous post. But in general it should be hidden if the user wants it that way.

IMO, both Builder status and upload cap can be played around using power votes, normal votes, favs, deletions, feedback, and so on. This, to avoid a flood of Meh posts. A user with uploads of good quality will need fewer posts to get a promotion that a user with tons of, lets say, regular posts. While getting promoted should be a desirable goal for both parts (new user and mod) There will be cases when the contribution may not meet the requirements no matter how many uploads the user has or how many deletions.

I agree with the idea of a warning about the upload systems in the signup page.

You can add as many info you want in the wiki, about tools, scripts, and stuff, but I don't think that will solve things, there will only be more people doing the same. As I see it is not about getting rid of prolific uploaders but about how to make the whole process more friendly to new users in a way that does not lead to a bunch of crap being uploaded. A way to get more post from different sources and artists...and correctly tagged aswell.

Well, yeah.

I think the problem was never about "prolific uploaders" as much as it was "why do we almost (and practically) only have prolific uploaders?" And as mentioned multiple times, it is because contributing to this site is both notoriously difficult and tiring, especially within the uploading domain. This goes for both veteran users that have long given up uploading, and new users that would contribute but have little willpower to. Nobody wants to contribute to a site that inevitably rewards the most scumbag user.

As it stands, this site indirectly rewards you for employing "unfair" strategies. Mintagging posts as they're made available is accepted and allowed, and is an easy method to looking like a good uploader when in fact you really aren't. Like I said before, nobody gives a shit whether a post shows up 5 seconds earlier or 5 seconds later, but uploaders clearly do when they see someone's name on it, as that attributes an unnecessary amount of credit and responsibility to that user.

"What? A post that was mintagged? You better tag it like a saint then, otherwise I will pressure you, and never let you have content from that artist again." Things like that.

There is very little problem with the way the upload restrictions work right now because a handful of users still upload a LOT less than their limit allows them to. You get roughly 40-50 posts everyday if you're a reliable user that knows where to find content and knows which approvers to please. In fact, if you have difficulty reaching this limit, I recommend you join my discord server and I will give you all the content you might desire as long as you source it correctly and tag it well. But as I'm aware, practically none of the member-level users come that close to the theoretical 1500 uploads per month cap.

This is a big misconception.
Only because you don't reach this doesn't mean that there is no reason to not do this. See it from an users perspective and not from someone who only judges in numbers:
The current system works like this: If you don't get any deletions then you are fine but Approvals don't really matter. The whole system is in fear of receiving a deletion but it doesn't rewartd good uploading at all. Furthermore, most users have to wait until they reach much more than 1000 uploads to gain this "unlimited" status. This really shouldn't be.
Of course with this system in place people don't even remotely come close to the limit they potentially have. Why?
The reason is fairly obvious, it's similar to how children behave and humans are still having this sense: Children are doing more effort when they get rewarded with a candy and they are doing only the most neccessary if they are threatened because they fear they might mess up if they are doing more than already and that is limiting the "productivity" drastically.
And even if: There is absolutely no harm in doing so. If you are arguing this way then in the end no more uploads are uploaded with that logic. But I say that members are actually more happy when they see fast approved stuff and that it gets rewarded. Most stuff is also approved within 10 hours and everything that is older is mostly crap (not only but the vast majority. That's because that stuff got already reviewed by over 10 approvers (look at the moderation queue).

This system ultimately rewards those users who are fast at typing tags and have a post tagged with roughly 25 tags. That is mostly enough to have contributed as the "Most Valuable Tagger" but users who are doing more won't really get credited if we go with "1 gentag = 1 point". Those who are going to flesh out a post's tag won't see any credits then. The current system still puts focus on all taggers because we have to lok this actually up. But if we have a MVT credit then the assumption will be that only this person did write the tags.

EDIT: Removed this comment

Mikaeri said:

\o/

Sorry, but @Provence I really can't take you seriously. Your arguments are just full of holes. I'd pick them all out for you but it's too much effort.

To sum it up, you basically fail to see the bigger picture and instead focus on tiny little details. For one, "only because you don't reach this?" I used to be in the top of the uploader rankings almost every month. I see a lot more than just numbers; I see a system that fails to work because such numbers can explain that reasoning.

Stop pushing your misconceptions about the system and instead focus on what the real problem is here. You know you are part of this problem, you just can't admit it because you want to continue feeling good about yourself, that you feel as if this site only needs you, who I think is ultimately counter-productive and oppressive in this system of affairs.

And really, what is this spiel about being similar to "how children behave and humans are still having this sense." This makes zero sense to me.

We'll see how the reports will look like after some time.
You say that more uploaders are uploading more stuff and that there will be new users. The first two thing can be looked up pretty fast, I'd say give it one month.
If we are getting new users because of this might be looked up a bit later.

But there is simply a missing incentive for uploading. Which is why the other suggestion is to make it first happen during rush i.e. the time where this problem is most present.
I think we have to take a look at this again after one or two months have passed. Make this system happen so we can see if the critics are justified or not. If they are justified then it should be undone.

(And the comparison was made because humans want to get rewarded actively for stuff that they are doing. Which is why I say we should actively reward good uploads by giving a new slot for every approved post. Of course this should also apply to uploading

Type-kun said:

Can we try to pinpoint the exact problem here? Is it people getting angry simply about losing the upload competition to someone else, and not getting their username (and all associated statistics) next to it? Or is it that people are angry about wasting their time tagging a post that someone else has already uploaded by the time they did, possibly with minimal tags? Or is it something else after all?

Also, here's a crazy idea. I was going to say that we absolutely need uploader names for statistics. Then I kinda realized that we only need those statistics when looking up users for promotions to unrestricted uploads. So how about creating an artificial, hivemind-like user, and attributing all uploads from users with unrestricted uploads to that user? Much like all formerly-anonymous changed were attributed to user named Anonymous during transition to D2. In a way, you either give up your unrestricted uploads, or become a part of a faceless uploader cartel. Naturally, it should still be possible to look up the original uploader by looking at the tag history (and it SHOULD be preserved to avoid abuse of anonymity), but that would strip people of bragging rights without much change in the code.

I actually thought about this, and I preferred this solution also (as many other danbooru-reposting boorus do this and attribute the credit to "System" or "danbooru" or some other generic scraper name), but I think it would necessitate a change in the way we search meta fields. That is, we'd have "Uploader:System" and then "firstedit:Mikaeri" or something like that, just so users can find that kinda stuff.

In any case though, yes -- the majority of problems stems from the fact people losing the competition. You take away the reason to compete, and then you reduce:

• Salt downvotes. Currently a problem with some users, and especially a number of them that practice this semi-proactively. Won't list names, but they know who they are, and are easy to find.
• Shitty tagging habits. Mintagging, filler tags, guesswork tags (a post is not made available yet, but the artist has the trend of incorporating similar traits in almost all of his works -- see matsunaga_kouyou).
• Ego or "glory" uploads. Users that upload in a 1up that they perceive to be a better post, just for one of us to discover it's an inferior duplicate.

Akiraka8 said:

I don't see any healthy reason to anonymize the work that people are doing here (unless those people choose to be private). The resentment angle is totally wrong. People should always be given credit for their contributions, and top uploaders (and people who do other helpful things) should be seen as leaders who can help others improve the site similarly.

Weighting tags and rewarding tagging definitely sound good. There was concern about people adding pointless tags for credit, and also just going for the popular tags, but I think that could be alleviated by grading on a bell curve (by total tag count) and having the centre of the curve weigh the most. That way, the extreme highs (1girl) and extreme lows (card_on_necklace) will weigh less than tags that make up the middle and therefore hit the sweetspot of descriptive variety and useful organization.

If stagnation is really a concern, maybe it's worthwhile looking into expanding some social features to promote a sense of community for new people, even if it just means linking users with similar taste or making toplists of the users who have contributed the most in a variety of ways each day/week/month/year and then giving them a _temporary_ prize (more search tags, more uploads, +1 voting power -who knows what else- which might also encourage users to upgrade to keep those perks permanently or to keep contributing to maintain them temporarily). Prizes could even be separated by user class so that the builders don't automatically clean house.

Basically, I think that more roads to improvement and more opportunities for community engagement will help heal the resentment and negativity. Back to the private tracker analogy, when someone complains about the system it's always shot down with, "you can find another way," and that's because those opportunities do exist for those who make the effort, and the community is there to help.

Okay, so I like a lot of these ideas also.

Quite frankly the whole +1 +1 -1 thing for the Tagger field mentioned in forum #141717 was really only a generic prototype for how I imagine things would work, but indeed, tags that hit that sweet spot of being detailed enough to be useful but not esoteric are definitely the most valued tags. To be fair, if a user only tags about like 25 things or so in an image but all of them are rather descriptive and concise about a post, then they deserve the credit. @iridescent_slime may have more insight into this, but if such a field were implemented, then we will definitely need a better rubric to grading tagging quality. That is, we can't value overtagging (as that in itself is already a huge problem, nobody cares about extremely minute and insignificant details) and we can't value undertagging either.

In regards to the community aspect, I'd agree but... The thing is about booru right now is that it doesn't attract that kind of user. The side project I'm slowly working on does have something like that (it rewards users for contributions without putting overt emphasis on their name being there), where you earn badges and can also "donate" to a post you like to show up in a special ranking... But what I gathered from the last community survey held this year was that users didn't want booru to become more of a "community" even though there'd be positives to it. For one, I think it doesn't help that many of the users we attract may be fairly polarizing to each other.

It's a good adage though, that you mention. "More roads to improvement and more opportunities for community engagement will help heal the resentment and negativity." However I don't think it's enough when the system is inherently lopsided towards promoting the user who employs the shittier tactic, whether indirectly or directly.

Nice insight though, I appreciate it. It's just that, perhaps you'd see why it's such a problem once you became a frequent uploader, since the "score/favorite rush" that some of us experience is definitely a thing that makes our egos artificially inflated.

Provence said:

We'll see how the reports will look like after some time.
You say that more uploaders are uploading more stuff and that there will be new users. The first two thing can be looked up pretty fast, I'd say give it one month.
If we are getting new users because of this might be looked up a bit later.

But there is simply a missing incentive for uploading. Which is why the other suggestion is to make it first happen during rush i.e. the time where this problem is most present.
I think we have to take a look at this again after one or two months have passed. Make this system happen so we can see if the critics are justified or not. If they are justified then it should be undone.

(And the comparison was made because humans want to get rewarded actively for stuff that they are doing. Which is why I say we should actively reward good uploads by giving a new slot for every approved post. Of course this should also apply to uploading

sigh

I did not say that.

There is simply a missing incentive? The incentive right now is that if you mintag all the content you see, you are almost guaranteed to get your name on it first if someone else isn't doing the same thing (if they're actually being diligent and fully tagging a post before uploading). You're missing the point.

Sniping DOESN'T make users good uploaders. Nobody wants that kind of user, and anyone who does is insanely wrong. I would rather a user who takes the good 2-3 minutes to tag the basics rather than someone who's obsessive enough to tag the 3-5 absolutely necessary things, just to try to bump it to 50+ tags later and cover it up with the facade of them being good enough to deserve all that credit going to their head.

It doesn't help, having users like that around. They know who they are, and they know who they're keeping out.

forum #141713 -- We can have a general prediction on how things might work, but I don't think it'd go this route, to be honest with you. It sounds to me this is really more of a problem with the interface in general (which has been improving, thankfully), but we don't validate URLs by any scheme on upload or on edit. Anyone can change a source to anything they want, and the changes are only maintained by user-run scripts, outside of the site.

forum #141714 -- tl;dr no. Slightly longer tl;dr: The most valued user in regards to the post is often the tag gardener. Oftentimes we trust it to be the uploader, but there are also tons of times you can't trust the original uploader because they're terrible at making that effort. Case in point with new users that submit something and then get immediately criticized for not doing it properly for a popular work people will get salty over. And yes, we do need the uploader name there for pending posts, but once it's accepted, it's accepted into the gallery and the uploader name no longer matters. Said this multiple times, will continue to say it until I pass out.

forum #141718 -- Alright, this is another one of these "the problem is not x, but y!" posts. I understand the sentiment that there is, yes, plenty of good content to upload that isn't up yet, but you kinda have to understand that not everyone wants to upload completely acceptable content whenever they please, because that takes time and effort to. It's all a matter of mood, and however much they like that content. I can't be assed to upload every one of tofuvi's works, for example, even though I love her work. Yet I'll usually be in the mood for high-scoring fanservicey posts because they're easy to get attracted to. For the most part, everyone knows danbooru is mainly used to find fanservice. No hiding it

The tag edit sniping thing is not a problem, by the way (as mentioned by others, we'd actually prefer that!). I've done this quite a number of times where I've pretagged content for a user to upload just for no one to get it fast enough... Um, post #2869246 is one example. Also some of the stuff a certain user has uploaded.

forum #141719

Uploading is SUPER trivial. You put a source in, click submit, boom you're done. Contrary to what you may believe, tagging is actually fairly difficult for new users. Oftentimes most users don't know where to start, and the pages for them are written fairly haphazardly. We can improve that, but it isn't so much tagging is difficult, but moreso it's a pain in the ass that most people don't want to learn or do even with their knowledge.

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 is diffusing responsibility, unless you don't know what diffusing means. Oh, I answered this already. See forum #141724, namely the "Tagging on upload made optional? What a nightmare" part.

And repeated nods to the opt-out option, which is starting to get to the point of ad nauseum.

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.

That's how it already works. If you get 1upped, then whoever 1upped you will also look like a good tagger, even though all they did was copypasta your tags on an inferior post. There are some users that make it a habit to do this. This doesn't make me wrong, I'm just acknowledging that it doesn't solve that problem unless you make everything nameless or introduce post versioning (something, again, I've mentioned tons of times in my own server to attribute due effort).

forum #141735 -- Only during the pixiv rush? There is good content posted at any point during the day. This pilot solution won't go very far, nor will it solve much.

Those three things have one thing in common: They tend to get a high score. [...] So what is it: The amount of "prolific" uploaders or that fanservice, bikini and porn gets higher attention and the user uploading these wins?

No way, they did? I didn't know at all, I could've swore they were all low-score content /s

Really though? Yes, both. Everyone likes fanservice. Like 90% of order:rank's first page is fanservice. Uploaders like uploading fanservice. You can't possibly argue that we are all that saintly not to.

forum #141751

New users aren't afraid of uploading much stuff because they think it's covered by "rockstar" uploaders.

No.

But they are scared off because it's hard to even start.

Yes.

But they are scared off because it's hard to even start. The moderation process is way to harsh. The upload limit is very restrictive and doesn't reward actively good uploading behavior (one approval = one new slot) but only passively (no deletion = max. upload limit).

But not because of that. The system does reward actively good uploading behavior, that's the point of the upload limit being calculated as a threshold of both a user's approved and deleted posts in the past 100 days. It's just that it's been generally accepted that users never really break 50+, and by the time they are they're already unlimited. And didn't it work this way in the past? I remember many complaints about this, from back when I didn't even start contributing to this site. Think it was the affair with NOOU and all.

We need to start at cleaning this mess up where contributing starts and trying to make it easier to start contributing.

Okay, that's something we can agree on, but I think these "solutions" you're coming up with need better thought put in them.

I think you should probably stop insinuating things against me only because I upload a lot stuff. Yes, I notice that I am part of this problem but I also try to take a look from someone who is not all that experienced in tagging. I still think I would get the credit, but that's not it.
Yes, I do upload a lot but that stuff isn't always the latest stuff that gets uploaded to Pixiv (but I'm still interested in these stuff of course).
Anyway, I have turned of Distill and other notifications for quite a while now since oter users don't want to use them or aren't aware of this. Great, but I still tend to get a large amount of uploads even after I have switched my upload behavior a few days ago.
It is that I still know a lot of tags and how I can find and use them, also before upload (I guess one big argument for mintagging was that uploading before is tiring but it really isn't if you know how).
Now of course I was saying that tagging is not all that difficult. In hindsight, I think you should notice where this is coming from but I think I have to change my reasoning a bit: It is difficult for new users to learn how to tag. The wikis are doing an awful job at telling you how to learn this and the checklist is simply a large list of tags in the end. The first might be useful, the checklist wiki isn't helpful at all.
In the end, experienced taggers will get the most credit when this is in place. I am also an experienced tagger just like you but I am against this policy change. But why?
The reason is that I tag a lot stuff on my uploads. I know that you don't like my tagging but these tags are ultimately describing what you are seeing. Which is why we two had some arguments about how tagging should be like.
But I don't want to be the most valuable tagger of an upload when I get sniped on a post, for example with 23 vs 54 tags (both on upload). I would then get replaced as the Most Valuable Tagger for this post and the person with 23 tags would not be noticed as the tagger but also not as the person who brought this post up. I could now hide my name but I would just assume that the first tagger would get pretty frustrated if this happens multiple times. While fast taggers will profit from this I fear that we will exclude less through persons from the course then because we focus now stronger on tagging and this is very easy for me and you or nonamethanks or Unbreakable but pretty hard for new users.

But as you can see, I try to protect the users that aren't that thoroughly with tagging but I don't want to protect those who are mintagging their uploads (I realized this is shitty and like I said above put my tags before the upload. I think to make people not frustrated we might still tag posts that are mintagged on upload. Then the first uploader probably shouldn't matter all that much, especially if it's a snipe and you have 20 tags to boost it with. That I think would be fine. But if we are about to bumtag someone who uploaded something with 23 tags and then we bump it with 25 tags then I would be pretty sure that it will become frustrating for the user.

Anyway, we will see how it really plays out. We can say that the other's reasoning has holes as much as we like, but I think there are some persons who have some criticism for it and how it might play out. If nothing of this happens, then I am completely fine with this change but I think we should still observe the numbers from today and how the numbers will look like later.
One should also keep an eye on the upload tags and if it really counters mintagging on upload or not.
We also have to ask if we are really attracting more people and how certain reports are developing:
https://isshiki.donmai.us/user-reports/post_changes/%21CURRENT.html
https://isshiki.donmai.us/user-reports/member_uploads/%21CURRENT.html
https://isshiki.donmai.us/user-reports/contributor_uploads/%21CURRENT.html
I think those are the three reports that should be observed closely and after some time we should compare the development before and after the change. Maybe it really does help the site, I don't want to deny this.
Or maybe the expectation is something completely else. Could we set what we are really expecting to see from this change and what should look at if not these three things? This wasn't my idea, but I fear the whole point why this should be done went lost all the times.

Anyway, I hope I am done now with the criticism I have. Maybe it's all unjustified which I hope is if this change is going to be made reality in the next weeks.

Like albert said in the opening post, one of the main concerns is this:

What I worry, however, is that some users are treating uploads as a game where they try to maximize their score by uploading as much as possible. That is definitely not the purpose of this site.

We make SO many nods to those reports, which really only confirms my suspicions. What I'm seeing when I browse my pixiv feed is that content that's popular on pixiv and the like, yet not booru-popular (because it isn't fanservicey enough), is the content that has the largest margins by which they are not uploaded from when they are made available. I've called this in my chat with other users repeatedly as the "tofuvi syndrome" (tofuvi being an artist I think makes amazing content, yet isn't updated regularly).

There is no doubt in my mind we want good content. Duh. But when it becomes a game, where uploaders only want to upload the stuff that gets the highest scores, the exclusive patreon rewards and the pretagged hentai that gets insta-upped from pixiv/seiga/whatever, then you'll start to only get that content. The gallery will suffer. Whether you prefer it like that, who knows. You can make your own little booru instance for that with enough effort.

And besides, linking to the member uploads report only confirms my suspicions that the upload limit REALLY isn't a concern, because you keep bringing it up when it really isn't such a problem. Good uploaders get promoted in a timely manner, it's just that no one new and good enough show up. Aforementioned reasons, scroll up. nanami is at the top with 500 uploads, and nanami isn't really that bad (and neither does he hit his cap often).

Regarding the tagger thing, honestly this is what I think. Maybe we can consider doing a checkmark that makes tag contributions "zero worth" and don't count towards the point count if you're that annoyed (this change could be reversible if you change your mind). There are always solutions that can be improved. Just because you find one bad apple, you shouldn't give up the whole tree. Work with something that sounds decent, and make it amazing.

I have hopes for danbooru, but with users like these, who keep pushing things like this, all it does is hinder progress because of that naive mindset. But whichever way this site goes, something must change, especially if you want to make this a site for everyone. Don't make it a pain in the ass, because there will always be users out there who may do things so much better than we do right now. But they can't show up if things continue like this.

Anyway, I hope I am done now with the criticism I have. Maybe it's all unjustified which I hope is if this change is going to be made reality in the next weeks.

If this change goes through, and we start to see a more healthy gallery because of it, then my hunch was right, that this shit kept this site from progressing. This was a problem I've brooded about for a long time. I've said I had regrets, multiple times, one of them being releasing that pandora's box of information.

Since I'm not aware if you have read the edit: What should we focus on to measure this concept's success or failure?

EDIT: No, I mean it like this: If the concerns are unjustified and I really hope they are since I also want that Danbooru keeps growing.

EDIT2: I think you misunderstood something abut the Pixiv rush: This argument was brought up because I think it is good to have a time where we wuld be able to see the consequences. Of course stuff gets uploaded all around the clock, but the most stuff is during Pixiv rush.
The name will also not re-appear after the 2 hours but I think it wuld be better to first look how uploading and tagging changes or not during this time before fully realizing this change.

Easy. Look at the health of the gallery. Expect more high quality uploads, and a more diverse content library. Oh, yes, and more names aside from the few we see like all the time. :P

'hooki, yeah I misread. I thought you meant the criticisms I have about you. Anyways, edited :P

Whenever I write something, I always think about its causes and effects as to whether it is worth expending the resources to, and whether it can be improved on.

Maybe you should try to argue against the points (ok, you are doing this), but I really don't know why you want to attack me personally.

Anyway, this change will be made in a few days or weeks. I'll just observe the upload and tagging habits and if (new) users are coming (back) r if they will reduce their workload.
Also the amount of tags added to every post should be observed then.

Just passing by, but I think I will say this nonetheless.
After skimmed this topic, I think many users in here said their opinions based from a viewpoint of senior uploaders/taggers, who already made their uploading/tagging activity as a hobby or a habit. Like for example, wuv u's statement that "the problem is x, not y" post. When I read this, it is so clearly written from a viewpoint of a senior user, who already mastered many tricks about uploading and know how to to find a good artist(s).

Remember, we are focusing on NEW USERS here. Those are users that are still on "try or leave it" stage on Danbooru. Hobbies/Habit for uploading or tagging are nurtured OVER TIME, not immediately. I actually want to "spoil" the new users more, if it's a right thing to do to keep this site healthy. Heck, in 2017 we barely have any new good dedicated uploaders. In fact, many good old users are leaving this site for good.

If Danbooru is a corporation, with this current state, I'd say that Danbooru is a very bad one indeed. Why? Because Danbooru gives too much pressure for newcomers, to the point that newcomers will run away in their very first day. The argument "oh they are not good/strong/diligent enough" is bullshit. New users are as vital as old users, unless old users want to stay on this site and keep contributing forever.

As a little aside, @evazion did say in the Discord chat yesterday that Danbooru was indeed nameless regarding uploading for some time at the beginning. A time when all these MD Anonmyous" accounts were around.

Taking this into account then there had to be a reason why we made uploading not nameless. I don't know if a topic about that change exists and if it's still relevant to date, but maybe one should also take some reasoning from there into account.

Anyway, after re-reading some points, also the first post on this page but more so Sariven's post then it seems to be the case that we are accustomed t the recent system and that change is always considered a "bad thing". Now I will stay with what I said and think that we will get new problems and that it might fail. If they are harsher or not is something we will see in the end. I will stay keep up with the Contributions since I want to give the change a chance .

By the way @albert when do you think you can pull this change eventually?

Sacriven said:

Remember, we are focusing on NEW USERS here. Those are users that are still on "try or leave it" stage on Danbooru. Hobbies/Habit for uploading or tagging are nurtured OVER TIME, not immediately. I actually want to "spoil" the new users more, if it's a right thing to do to keep this site healthy. Heck, in 2017 we barely have any new good dedicated uploaders. In fact, many good old users are leaving this site for good.

Do we have any proof that new users want uploader names to be hidden? The impression I'm getting from this thread is that it's veteran users frustrated with getting beaten (for whatever reason it's happening) to new, popular posts that want this. It actually feels like it would instead demotivate the segment of new users who would want their upload contributions to be recognized.

EB said:

Do we have any proof that new users want uploader names to be hidden? The impression I'm getting from this thread is that it's veteran users frustrated with getting beaten (for whatever reason it's happening) to new, popular posts that want this. It actually feels like it would instead demotivate the segment of new users who would want their upload contributions to be recognized.

Pretty much this. All the new active uploaders I've spoken to only expressed frustration in not getting their name displayed because they were getting sniped.

Why not make a global poll like in Fate's case if you want a general opinion? I doubt most active uploaders actually even checked this thread, as they usually don't post in the forum at all.

nonamethanks said:

Pretty much this. All the new active uploaders I've spoken to only expressed frustration in not getting their name displayed because they were getting sniped.

Why not make a global poll like in Fate's case if you want a general opinion? I doubt most active uploaders actually even checked this thread, as they usually don't post in the forum at all.

Exactly this.
We talk so much about this, but only a few users have been taken part of this.
The Fate tags have much, much less impact on the site than this huge policy change.