"Backlog" isn't the issue, it's that having fewer approvers means a narrower range of tastes gets approved.
Posted under General
DownWithTheThickness said:
On a related note, has auto-approving posts that pass a certain popularity threshold (either upvotes, favorites, or both) been floated before? (Obviously it would need some sort of anti-sockpuppeting measure like excluding brand-new accounts from the ranking, but still.)
That would just mean that all female-focus q and e art would be auto-approved and almost no safe art would, it's just not a good idea.
blindVigil said:
This has been covered before in multiple topics. 70% of uploads bypass the modqueue, out of 2000ish daily uploads, only about 600 of them actually go through the queue, which for 40 something approvers is only 15 posts per approver if every single one is active. Half that number of approvers would be just 30 posts. Most posts that get approved do so within a few hours, so it's not like there's ever a massive backlog of unnapproved posts.
The latter math would only be if you wanted 1 approver per post. If you wanted at least 10 approvers to see your post then the 600 posts would be split into 4 groups, each going over 150 posts.
blindVigil said:
Most posts that get approved do so within a few hours, so it's not like there's ever a massive backlog of unnapproved posts.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but a post is kept in the queue until it either times out after 3 days or is seen by 10 approvers, right? Doesn't that mean that posts like post #4530468 that only say 6 approvers were in the backlog until they fell out?
DownWithTheThickness said:
Correct me if I'm wrong, but a post is kept in the queue until it either times out after 3 days or is seen by 10 approvers, right? Doesn't that mean that posts like post #4530468 that only say 6 approvers were in the backlog until they fell out?
No, the only limit is 3 days or if it's manually deleted before that, there is no upper approver limit.
Lobuttomize said:
The latter math would only be if you wanted 1 approver per post. If you wanted at least 10 approvers to see your post then the 600 posts would be split into 4 groups, each going over 150 posts.
I was focused more on actual approval, which only requires a single person to say yes. You can't see how many people reviewed an approved post, for all you know the approver was the first and only person to review it, or they might have been the 20th. Definitively good posts usually get approved within the first two hours of being uploaded, often within minutes, meaning only debatable or worse posts actually sit in the queue for longer than a day, and the 8+ people that reviewed it possibly did so within the first hour. This means the actual average queue size at any given time isn't as big as the total upload numbers would suggest, and I doubt it takes more than a few seconds for an approver to decide if they like something or not.
NNT also pointed out that approvers don't always bother to actually pass a vote on every post they review, so it might say 10, but actually far more people actually looked at it. I remember it being mentioned a while back that some approvers don't even use the queue to do their job.
Unbreakable said:
No, the only limit is 3 days or if it's manually deleted before that, there is no upper approver limit.
Interesting. I thought that the reason so many have exactly 10 was that it stopped being presented to approvers after that point, even if the post was still technically "pending".
Almost all high quality posts that enter the queue are currently being approved. If a user's uploads are consistently being deleted due to not being liked, then their quality was likely borderline at best and the onus should be on the uploader to change the types of content they're posting. I don't see punishing users less for borderline quality uploads to be desirable.
blindVigil said:
I was focused more on actual approval, which only requires a single person to say yes. You can't see how many people reviewed an approved post, for all you know the approver was the first and only person to review it, or they might have been the 20th. Definitively good posts usually get approved within the first two hours of being uploaded, often within minutes, meaning only debatable or worse posts actually sit in the queue for longer than a day, and the 8+ people that reviewed it possibly did so within the first hour. This means the actual average queue size at any given time isn't as big as the total upload numbers would suggest, and I doubt it takes more than a few seconds for an approver to decide if they like something or not.
NNT also pointed out that approvers don't always bother to actually pass a vote on every post they review, so it might say 10, but actually far more people actually looked at it. I remember it being mentioned a while back that some approvers don't even use the queue to do their job.
I don't think it's true that most approvals happen quickly. A lot of my approved submissions took over a day
Obstetrics said:
Almost all high quality posts that enter the queue are currently being approved. If a user's uploads are consistently being deleted due to not being liked, then their quality was likely borderline at best and the onus should be on the uploader to change the types of content they're posting. I don't see punishing users less for borderline quality uploads to be desirable.
True, but the devil is in the details. If 70% of new posts bypass the modqueue anyways, how many "borderline" posts sneak through on unrestricted accounts that might not get an "approval" by another mod, but just never warrant an actual flag? And how might that mess with new users' perception of what constitutes "good enough to upload"?
DownWithTheThickness said:
True, but the devil is in the details. If 70% of new posts bypass the modqueue anyways, how many "borderline" posts sneak through on unrestricted accounts that might not get an "approval" by another mod, but just never warrant an actual flag? And how might that mess with new users' perception of what constitutes "good enough to upload"?
Even moderated stuff seems a bit all over the place in terms of whether it will get approval. post #4546008 in particular confused me greatly as it was approved extremely quickly despite looking like a rough sketch. Not trying to bash, it genuinely does have me second-guessing what I thought would work as an upload currently.
Lobuttomize said:
I don't think it's true that most approvals happen quickly. A lot of my approved submissions took over a day
And you've uploaded how many posts? All of my small number of uploads were approved within minutes to hours. Neither of our extremely small sample sizes can be used as evidence of anything, that's confirmation bias. But I can skim any number of posts for any given day, check when they were approved, and see that the vast majority of them were approved the same day.
blindVigil said:
And you've uploaded how many posts? All of my small number of uploads were approved within minutes to hours. Neither of our extremely small sample sizes can be used as evidence of anything, that's confirmation bias. But I can skim any number of posts for any given day, check when they were approved, and see that the vast majority of them were approved the same day.
It's not really confirmation bias, but it is anecdotal evidence. Checking just approved posts for a raw number wouldn't be a good representation, either. Would somehow have to actually see how many posts took over 24 hours to approve
Lobuttomize said:
post #4546008 in particular confused me greatly as it was approved extremely quickly despite looking like a rough sketch.
Actually, yeah, that's a great example of a confusing one. I certainly wouldn't have bet my upload limit on that one passing. But I also don't know what the etiquette here would be. "Bad" art is supposed to be flagged, and in my estimation that falls south of the approval line, but is it "bad" enough to warrant flagging it? All the criteria are kinda fuzzy.
DownWithTheThickness said:
Actually, yeah, that's a great example of a confusing one. I certainly wouldn't have bet my upload limit on that one passing. But I also don't know what the etiquette here would be. "Bad" art is supposed to be flagged, and in my estimation that falls south of the approval line, but is it "bad" enough to warrant flagging it? All the criteria are kinda fuzzy.
It already got flagged and was re-approved (first time it was auto-approved).
DownWithTheThickness said:
Actually, yeah, that's a great example of a confusing one. I certainly wouldn't have bet my upload limit on that one passing. But I also don't know what the etiquette here would be. "Bad" art is supposed to be flagged, and in my estimation that falls south of the approval line, but is it "bad" enough to warrant flagging it? All the criteria are kinda fuzzy.
Already tried because that's what I thought. Was unmoderated before