Flag Vandalism

OOZ662 said:

Why wouldn't it be? A Contributor has unmoderated upload capability because they've proven that their uploads are consistently of a high quality. If they then start uploading junk, they shouldn't expect to keep said capability.

Exactly.

Or did @NCAA_Gundam mean the part that it shouldn't be discussed in public (i.e. if a user has too many deleted posts due to flagging, it should be discussed in the forums (which is a bad way, honestly).
But I can only say what I think regarding Contributors and flags again: No Contributor is failing. Sure, there may be one or two flagged posts for one Contributor, but that is nowhere close to demotion in my eyes...

Provence said:

Exactly.

Or did @NCAA_Gundam mean the part that it shouldn't be discussed in public

This portion, actually. Thanks for providing an example that explains more in detail what you were thinking about regarding discussion in public. How it initially sounded too insider.

NCAA_Gundam said:

This portion, actually. Thanks for providing an example that explains more in detail what you were thinking about regarding discussion in public. How it initially sounded too insider.

Don't know what you are actually trying to say here :P.

Provence said:

Don't know what you are actually trying to say here :P.

He doesn't like it when users, i.e. you and me, discussing in secrecy about demotion for a certain user.

tl;dr he wants transparency when it comes to demotion or anything related.

Sacriven said:

He doesn't like it when users, i.e. you and me, discussing in secrecy about demotion for a certain user.

tl;dr he wants transparency when it comes to demotion or anything related.

I know. But why? Isn't that part of the moderation then? I mean...the user receive a DMail if there are many flags. So they know what is going on.

Just to chime in, if you weren't already aware, let it be known that there are now Moderator+ threads where they have discussed and probably will continue to discuss promotion/demotion of certain users. As Provence said, that's part of moderation. If the user affected by such doesn't agree with the results, they can always protest through Dmail to a Moderator/Admin or in the open forums to everyone.

BrokenEagle98 said:

Just to chime in, if you weren't already aware, let it be known that there are now Moderator+ threads where they have discussed and probably will continue to discuss promotion/demotion of certain users. As Provence said, that's part of moderation. If the user affected by such doesn't agree with the results, they can always protest through Dmail to a Moderator/Admin or in the open forums to everyone.

Yep, I can agree with this to 100% (except the very last part, but that's just me :P).

BrokenEagle98 said:

Just to chime in, if you weren't already aware, let it be known that there are now Moderator+ threads where they have discussed and probably will continue to discuss promotion/demotion of certain users. As Provence said, that's part of moderation. If the user affected by such doesn't agree with the results, they can always protest through Dmail to a Moderator/Admin or in the open forums to everyone.

Too little too late.

Is "face of an alien" considered a sufficient flag reason? parent:2547996

sweetpe@ said:

Is "face of an alien" considered a sufficient flag reason? parent:2547996

It's not, but after I saw those pics...
Let's just say that it's the harsh form of "bad face anatomy" word. Still, let's just wait for others to state their opinion.

sweetpe@ said:

Is "face of an alien" considered a sufficient flag reason? parent:2547996

I wouldn't approve it, but I can see their point. If someone else approves it I wouldn't mind. It is a bit borderline, and maybe should have gone through the moderation queue.

I would have used "bug-eyed" as a desciptor, myself.

sweetpe@ said:

Is "face of an alien" considered a sufficient flag reason? parent:2547996

The face looks weird as heck, but I'd have used something else to describe it.

post #2553165
How important is it that a flag contains "in my opinion" or something like that?
Because I quoted the wiki where it is written "if you believe" a.k.a. "If in your opinion".
So the question is: If a flag contains literally "in my opinion" but is still pointing out the flaw, should it be invalid, like @cd_young suggested?

btw post #2553126

"In my opinion" is redundant most of the time since most of the statements on this site (or life in general) are people stating opinion and therefore "in my opinion" is usually implied but not always stated.

However, just because it is a redundant addon doesn't make the overall statement any less valid IMHO...

post #1674198

flag reason: one of the notes was a bad translation

Wolffy000 said:

post #1674198

flag reason: one of the notes was a bad translation

Now that the message says "flagged for review," did this user think "review" meant "check the notes" and not "consider deletion?"

Now I've began to lose hope to any flaggers shenanigan with their so-called "quality control".
Basically, it's already close to "Such a good pic...OMG, hand/feet/leg is badly drawn!! Flag it! Flag it! Doesn't matter how good the pic is!".

This statement become irrelevant now.

Good night.

Sacriven said:

Now I've began to lose hope to any flaggers shenanigan with their so-called "quality control".
Basically, it's already close to "Such a good pic...OMG, hand/feet/leg is badly drawn!! Flag it! Flag it! Doesn't matter how good the pic is!".

This statement become irrelevant now.

Good night.

More like a fair few things going through the mod queue that would have been approved in the past now aren't being approved. This obviously has an impact on flagged images as well.

I don't think the problem here (assuming you're referring to the image you appealed) is the flag itself - more that this is just another case of an image that should have been (re)approved and hasn't been.

There are better images than that one that have gone through the queue without being accepted recently, though.

I'd like to bring up the fact that particular users continue misusing the appeal system with asinine and fruitless comments that bring absolutely nothing to the discussion/in favor of a post.
While it may not have as much impact as unwarranted flags (and especially so vandalistic ones) I believe those kind of appeals share the same kind of vandalistic nature to them.