RaisingK said:
I can accept that, if it's for a shitpost.
Seems rather arbitrary. With that reasoning, one could mass flag all posts they find "too weird" regardless of quality (post #3917001, post #5609807, post #5810628 etc. spring to mind).
Posted under General
RaisingK said:
I can accept that, if it's for a shitpost.
Seems rather arbitrary. With that reasoning, one could mass flag all posts they find "too weird" regardless of quality (post #3917001, post #5609807, post #5810628 etc. spring to mind).
post #5941392 and post #5945711. Making-of isnt off-topic.
ehh said:
Might be a self-flag.
It is.
Is this flag vandalism?
post #5952725 is not AI generated.
Flag reason: "This artist is known to trace and use AI art"
Updated
post #5964716
" Please, stop upload twitter lower quality then upload a higher one from pixiv! It'll waste time and upload."
Updated
Nacha said:
post #5964716
" Please, stop upload twitter lower quality then upload a higher one from pixiv! It'll waste time and upload."
Handled.
It's just 3676190 with the artist's signature deleted
According to ascii2d this is not a 3rd-party edit.
Veraducks said:
That's not vandalism.
Veraducks said:
For the record, these are not against the upload rules. They're redrawings of historically important pictures, and most importantly the IRL part is fully censored, so whether they belong on site is up to the approvers, like any other "normal" guro or guro-adjacent picture.
Updated
nonamethanks said:
For the record, these are not against the upload rules. They're redrawings of historically important pictures, and most importantly the IRL part is fully censored, so whether they belong on site is up to the approvers, like any other "normal" guro or guro-adjacent picture.
We're not a history site. We're an anime porn site. Given our proclivity for removing random questionable photos of IRL people I don't see why these get a pass. Because an approver uploaded them?
Talulah said:
We're not a history site. We're an anime porn site. Given our proclivity for removing random questionable photos of IRL people I don't see why these get a pass. Because an approver uploaded them?
See https://discord.com/channels/310432830138089472/710192137878241372/1064632173413539880 for a lengthy discussion we had on the matter.
Personally i think that pool is good content for danbooru, given the themes it touches on and the reaction it causes, but at the end of the day I'm just stating current policy as far as I'm aware of it, and it's not up to me to change it.
nonamethanks said:
They're redrawings of historically important pictures
They're not really even redrawings, just drawing over pictures that can already be found in their unaltered form elsewhere. If anything, slapping a mediocre photoshop of an anime girl on top cheapens the impact of the original pictures.
and most importantly the IRL part is fully censored
Except for the part where you can still see half of the corpse lying on the ground in post #4408542.
Personally i think that pool is good content for danbooru, given the themes it touches on and the reaction it causes
Why is "it's pretty tasteless to host photos of IRL dead bodies" a reaction that implies "good content"? This isn't like Maus or Schindler's list; in fact it's kinda the opposite, treating brutality and loss of human life as a joke instead of taking it seriously.
at the end of the day I'm just stating current policy as far as I'm aware of it, and it's not up to me to change it.
post #4408546 breaks the "Real photos of any person under the age of 18" prohibition, but that flag was rejected too.
DownWithTheThickness said:
post #4408546 breaks the "Real photos of any person under the age of 18" prohibition, but that flag was rejected too.
That rule is not meant for historical photos. We wouldn't delete a picture just because there's a photo inset of afghan girl either, even though she was underage when the photo was taken.
You're trying too hard to follow the literal reading of the rules instead of their intention.
nonamethanks said:
You're trying too hard to follow the literal reading of the rules instead of their intention.
If the intention isn't to protect IRL people from being depicted as minors on a hentai site without their consent, then I'm not entirely sure what the intention is. Same with the corpses, when it comes right down to it.