Magus said:
More than Explicit and Questionable combined in fact.
*searches rating:s - 11k pages*
*searches -rating:s - 8k pages*
You're right. I didn't exactly think of db as a hentai site, but that actually surprises me.
Posted under General
Scalar said:
Prepare to lose 90% of your viewership.
Magus said:
And nothing of value was lost.
Except the money albert gets from advertising and account upgrades.
Personally, I wouldn't go so far as to block new members from viewing explicit posts completely. I do, however, think it would be a good idea to strictly limit the number of explicit and questionable posts new members can upload/favorite/upvote/comment on per day. If people only had a limited number of upvotes/favorites per day they'd hopefully be a little more selective about using them on mediocre porn, and maybe develop better quality standards in the process. That's probably very optimistic thinking on my part, but at the very least it would limit the damage the average user could do.
Granola said:
The site is not to exclusively gather/distribute pornography.
I don't recall saying it is.
jxh2154 said:
rating:safe - 11,416 pages
rating:questionable - 5,147 pages
rating:explicit - 3,117 pages
abcadeff said:
*searches rating:s - 11k pages*
*searches -rating:s - 8k pages*
Thank you for the stat check. But you're missing the point. Danbooru has explicit images and that very fact makes this site NSFW. Have an analogy. I have some pure water. If I add one drop of liquid crap to it will you argue that the other 95% of the water is pure so it's drinkable? Same concept here.
Scalar said: But you're missing the point. Danbooru has explicit images and that very fact makes this site NSFW. Have an analogy. I have some pure water. If I add one drop of liquid crap to it will you argue that the other 95% of the water is pure so it's drinkable? Same concept here.
No no, you're the one missing the point, though it's a common mistake.
It's the fundamental difference between saying "Danbooru does not have porn" and "Danbooru is not a porn site". Huge, critical distinction, and should be understood by all. The latter absolutely does not imply the former, as 葉月's post made clear from the outset, and as I've been saying for a long time.
Nobody has ever claimed that danbooru does not or should not have any explicit images. Explicit images aren't comparable to the liquid crap because we're not aiming for pure water.
jxh2154 said:
No no, you're the one missing the point, though it's a common mistake.It's the fundamental difference between saying "Danbooru does not have porn" and "Danbooru is not a porn site". Huge, critical distinction, and should be understood by all. The latter absolutely does not imply the former, as 葉月's post made clear from the outset, and as I've been saying for a long time.
You're playing the semantics game and making a distinction where there is none. Okay I retract my earlier statement. Danbooru is not a hentai site. It is a site where hentai is posted and stored. And that changes nothing. The distinction is not as big as you make it and for practical uses it changes absolutely nothing.
葉月's proposal comes to this: We do not like people who think of us as a porn site so we must punish them. I think it's a waste of time and energy. The only good idea that has been proposed in this thread is:
evazion said:
I do, however, think it would be a good idea to strictly limit the number of explicit and questionable posts new members can upload/favorite/upvote/comment on per day. If people only had a limited number of upvotes/favorites per day they'd hopefully be a little more selective about using them on mediocre porn, and maybe develop better quality standards in the process. That's probably very optimistic thinking on my part, but at the very least it would limit the damage the average user could do.
Scalar said: Okay I retract my earlier statement. Danbooru is not a hentai site. It is a site where hentai is posted and stored. And that changes nothing. The distinction is not as big as you make it and for practical uses it changes absolutely nothing.
It changes everything. When people thinking something is just "a porn site", then everything they do revolves around this. It's abundantly clear in the attitudes of said people, in what they favorite, in what they upload. In their constant tired defenses of "But it's my fetish!" and "But there's worse!" and "But danbooru is a porn site [so it's okay to do whatever shit I want because it serves no purpose beyond providing fap material]!"
Instead of going straight to something extreme like this, maybe we should start by actually informing people this isn't a porn site. Considering there's porn on the front page, porn in the popular pages, porn in the ads, a large amount of porn here in general, and besides the occasional forum post like this just about NOTHING that says "this place isn't a porn site", it seems silly to jump on people for thinking it is.
jxh2154 said:
It changes everything. When people thinking something is just "a porn site", then everything they do revolves around this. It's abundantly clear in the attitudes of said people, in what they favorite, in what they upload. In their constant tired defenses of "But it's my fetish!" and "But there's worse!" and "But danbooru is a porn site [so it's okay to do whatever shit I want because it serves no purpose beyond providing fap material]!"
No it doesn't. The people who come here to masturbate aren't going to turn away because you changed "It's not a porn site" to "We just have porn." Investors and Comaponies don't care less if we claim "We're not a porn site we just have porn". It doesn't make a difference in the long run of things nor the short. Playing word and meaning games will not change the out come. Hence the reason I say it won't change practical uses of the site.
As for the posters complaint. It is completely valid. You don't down vote things because it doesn't fit your personal taste. We're trying to promote quality even if it's something you may not like.
+1 Hazuki's original proposal. Letting new users know prior to registration that they will need to wait one month before they are able to view explicit images will effectively deter at least a portion of users who come here with the sole intention of getting off to porn, and I can't see anything wrong with that.
Scalar said:
葉月's proposal comes to this: We do not like people who think of us as a porn site so we must punish them. I think it's a waste of time and energy.
I agree, actually. Although I completely understand 葉月 in his thinking.
WakuWaku said:
Instead of going straight to something extreme like this, maybe we should start by actually informing people this isn't a porn site.
Completely agreed.
I'm somewhat in the middle in what has now become the Scalar vs. mostly everyone else debate. On one hand, I hate the kind of people with the "fapper" attitude, this "ecchi rebirth" person being a good example, and I think an abundance of them could bring about a lot more shit posts. On the other hand, not everyone who just comes to Danbooru occasionally for a quick fap is an idiot like this, and 99% of them aren't even causing any problem, as far as I can see. Other than shitty posts and occasional bits of retarded drama in the comments, what IS the problem this thread was meant to address? And those problems (which are going to persist anyway, even if all of these people were gone) can be taken care of just like I said before: by janitors and mods not approving stuff they don't like, and maybe handing out blocks for people who consistently upload crap (the ones who don't get the hint after 20 of their first 30 posts aren't approved...) And, if you don't think that is sufficient, I still think alternative solutions should be discussed before completely blocking explicit posts from being seen by members/anonymous users.
holy shit why am I posting in the forum so much lately I feel like such a faggot
Oh yeah also
Scalar said:
As for the posters complaint. It is completely valid. You don't down vote things because it doesn't fit your personal taste. We're trying to promote quality even if it's something you may not like.
The way I see it, people should downvote an image for just about any reason they want, so long as it's within the context of the image itself.. If someone doesn't like the way a futa image looks just because they don't like futa, so be it. It's not like high scores get you a cash prize.
if dey did i wud be fukcin ballin o wait i alrady am lol
Scalar said: Playing word and meaning games will not change the out come. Hence the reason I say it won't change practical uses of the site.
Sigh. You really just don't get it for some reason.
As a policy, it involves more than simply saying it. It involves actual concrete steps, some of which already exist - having and enforcing a TOS, restricting certain tags, implementing a moderation queue. You cannot stop someone from coming here purely to find porn, but you can take steps to either make this more difficult for them or to change their expectations once they arrive. Or to contain the damage/implement further quality control to guard against the things such people do when they decide they're going to contribute from a "it's just for porn!" mindset.
Why and how you're still under the impression that we're just offering this as an empty slogan with no action to back it up (when the very thread you're replying to is suggesting a concrete "practical" action, regardless of whether you think it effective) is beyond me.
I didn't read all the comments but I wanted to chime in. I know the issue of the pic is long resolved, but I like good futa pics, but huge overly ridiculous ones are just annoying...though I know some people have no problem with ridiculously large breasts...but I'll leave that one alone.
Basically, I'm all for limiting member use and such, but I like FeKa's idea much better. There are already some quality posts that I can't link my friend to cause she doesn't have an account which I then have to re-save (I'm not searching for it in my sea of pics) and send it then delete it so I don't have (more) duplicates.
Additionally, very few check the forums, we know this. Instead of a post here about "this is not a porn site" you could add a simple "not a porn site" to the main page and maybe a "First time here?" link there and on the "Posts" page linking to the rules of the site that far too many people don't seem to know.
tldr: restricting all explicit images is a bit much...I'd definitely be happier with certain tags restricted and/or the rules more openly/readily available.
葉月 said:
I'd like to propose the following: member accounts cannot view explicit posts for the first month / two weeks / whatever time we deem sensible after registering. Afterwards they can access them as normal. Obviously, anonymous access to explicit posts should be forbidden as well.
I really doubt this will work. Remember ニコニコ動画's signup queue? AFAIK, nobody gave up on nico because their account would take a long time to activate, or had more restrictions the younger it was. They just waited. People looking for a "quick fap", though often disasters at understanding the atmosphere of this site and what is acceptable and unacceptable to do here, are still functioning human beings capable of using the internet. I wouldn't quite put it past them to be able to comprehend the concept of "the future".
Unless, of course, you want to make them think they'll never be able to see explicit posts, and then pleasantly surprise them a few weeks after they register. This won't work either, since the word would get out as fast as a photon escaping from the sun. ... uh, well, maybe a bit faster than that.
Granola said:
Members should also not be able to comment for 1-2 weeks after registering. Maybe this will stem the flood of posts saying "I agree" or "This is nice."Also, blocks should happen much more frequently, but for less amounts of time.
This is not a bad idea. Make sure to give a reason - let them try to comment, and when the error message appears, have the commenting rules in it. (e.g. "Sorry, but in order to avoid newfaggotry, we don't allow you to make comments yet. Please LURK MOAR and read the RULES." or something.) People usually read error messages, unlike Terms of Service.
evazion said:
I do, however, think it would be a good idea to strictly limit the number of explicit and questionable posts new members can upload/favorite/upvote/comment on per day.
Numerical limits are useless IMO.
Here's my suggestion. First and most important: have a "Rules" page, and short-ban anyone who doesn't stick to it. These "rules" should be MUCH broader than the ToS currently is. We can't really expect people to "acclimatize" to the danbooru environment simply by watching and learning, so besides the ToS itself, we need to have firm guidelines, or a written "code of conduct", if you will.
People are more inclined to read "Rules" than a "ToS", frankly. It should be one of the items on the toolbar, maybe even in caps or something. If we want, we can create a tutorial as an addendum to the rules, but don't make it something that's a one-time, "skippable" thing - put it somewhere easily accessible, so that users can go find it when they are confronted with "LURK MOAR" messages, or whatever non-4chan alternative we come up with.
Second: Make danbooru read-only for a short time for newly registered users, and hide explicit posts for unregistered users. By "read-only", I mean that new users shouldn't be allowed to post, comment, edit tags, add translations, make pools, vote, favorite, or generally do anything other than browse (i.e. what an unregistered user can currently already do). Make this period SHORT, though, otherwise people will just get bored and leave. During this period, any attempt to do anything should result in a "LURK MOAR" message and a link to the rules/tutorial. Hiding explicit posts to unregistered users encourages the interested to register, and deters the mindset that this is "just a porn site", though this SHOULD be spelled out in the "rules" page I am proposing. No need to mention this restriction anywhere, as I'm sure word will spread anyway.
This effectively keeps advertising and upgrade revenue at current levels while decreasing idiot activity, hopefully. Ramping up the ban frequency will 1) scare idiots into simply lurking (at which point we no longer care that they are idiots) or 2) reform idiots into better-functioning users.
The only problem I can see here is the time factor. We would need to determine what exactly a "SHORT" trial period for new users would be. A lot of sites have a 24-hour or 72-hour trial period. The only problem is that some people might register and then not actually log in until the next week, or something.
Any thoughts?
Updated