Here's your actual vandalism - or someone who doesn't know the rules post #2567527
Posted under General
Here's your actual vandalism - or someone who doesn't know the rules post #2567527
Does anyone think it should be made clearer in help:flag notice? Maybe an edit like:
The following are NOT valid reasons for flagging a post:
- Duplicate posts: just parent it to the original
- Offensive or objectionable content that does NOT violate Danbooru's posting guidelines.
- Banned artist: request that a member of site staff ban this post instead in topic #10525.
Seems this may not be a limited instance. post #2553126 and post #2558599 suggest that that are users out there who falsely believe that young girls portrayed in a sexually suggestive or explicit manner don't belong here.
Flandre5carlet said:
Here's your actual vandalism - or someone who doesn't know the rules post #2567527
Whoever he or she is, I bet he/she doesn't know the existence of loli tag. So not really a grave vandalism, just a plain ignorance.
Mikaeri said:
Does anyone think it should be made clearer in help:flag notice? Maybe an edit like:
Seems this may not be a limited instance. post #2553126 and post #2558599 suggest that that are users out there who falsely believe that young girls portrayed in a sexually suggestive or explicit manner don't belong here.
The problem is, do people even read those when flagging things?
Sacriven said:
The problem is, do people even read those when flagging things?
Not sure. But even if they didn't, I think there needs to be some sort of disclaimer there so they can't just claim "it's a good reason for deletion" even though we allow that kind of content (loli, shota, etc). And especially if it isn't explicitly loli or shota (as with those posts). Gold+ users presumably know enough about the site that loli/shota is allowed (which is why those posts don't get usually flagged for dumb reasons), but for regular users that 'think' something is loli/shota (even if its not tagged) and flag it… How do we make it more clear to them, especially if they don't do it with bad intentions?
I honestly don't know if there are any clearly described consequences for flaggers who consistently make flags with bad reasons. It appears to me that we handle them on a case-by-case basis since Mod+ are the only ones who can see who flagged a post outright. Maybe a once or twice incident is enough for them to learn. But the notice seems to suggest that there isn't anything "wrong" with flagging because of that lack of consequence or penalty.
Updated
I think in the case of post #2567527 it's best if this is handled by a DMail reminder from a Mod+ user, with no further sanctions (unless the flag abuser chooses to ignore the warning and repeat the same mistake, at which point neutral record -> negative record -> ban would come into play, with more severe sanctions the more persistent he is).
Added that line to help:flag notice.
The problem is, do people even read those when flagging things?
You can never force everyone read the rules, but when they're listed right there above the flag reason box there will be no excuse to be unaware of them.
evazion said:
Added that line to help:flag notice.
You can never force everyone read the rules, but when they're listed right there above the flag reason box there will be no excuse to be unaware of them.
There should never be an excuse to not know the rules if you are an user who did agree with the TOS and therefore the content of Danbooru.
That's why it would be really helpful to make a link in the help:flag notice of howto:flag.
The same goes for howto:tag if you are on the upload page. There should be a direct notice and not an indirect notice over howto:upload on said page.
It would reduce vandalism (maybe) and one could take action much faster, like writing a negative/neutral feedback if they have ignored the howto wikis, although they are mentioned right there.
Provence said:
There should never be an excuse to not know the rules if you are an user who did agree with the TOS and therefore the content of Danbooru.
That's why it would be really helpful to make a link in the help:flag notice of howto:flag.
The same goes for howto:tag if you are on the upload page. There should be a direct notice and not an indirect notice over howto:upload on said page.It would reduce vandalism (maybe) and one could take action much faster, like writing a negative/neutral feedback if they have ignored the howto wikis, although they are mentioned right there.
Completely agree. There is a reason why hyperlinks in this site is colored with blue :v
However, sometimes people simply doesn't care. Not like I can blame them or anything though, for it's the part of Internet's nature.
=====================================================
To be honest, I always think that we need a new "user level", the one that supervises and monitor flags in Danbooru. Its function isn't to approve flags or anything, instead its function is to remove unnecessary flags that doesn't violate Danbooru's posting guidelines.
But who should do that? I think the moderators are doing the job with this one. They are after all the ones who should know the rules.
But for flags, even moderators could get hit by that. If that is the case, then the moderator whose post is flagged should leave it to other moderators. It's like approving your own posts: There is bias.
Short: Moderators should handle this but should leave it to other mods to decide if their own post is flagged and they think it is not a "correct flag".
Just my opinion :3.
post #2567885
I did state my opnion in the comment section.
But since my word isn't the final statement, I wanted to ask the moderators what they think if
1. one part of the flag is not stating the quality of an image (first sentence) but
2. ends up being criticizing the post in the second part, here with the word "sketchy".
(Flag is not from me)
Any objections?
Provence said:
Any objections?
Provence said:
"I am trying to encourage flaggers to express their flags both as descriptively and concisely as possible, with as little fluff as possible."
Who is the "I" here? If a sentence like this is added, maybe a better wording would be something like "Please express the reason the post should be deleted as descriptively and concisely as possible, with as little fluff as possible."
fossilnix said:
Who is the "I" here? If a sentence like this is added, maybe a better wording would be something like "Please express the reason the post should be deleted as descriptively and concisely as possible, with as little fluff as possible."
Of course in another wording. It's only the content.
And if no one comes up with a better sentence, maybe we could use what you've written.
fossilnix said:
Who is the "I" here? If a sentence like this is added, maybe a better wording would be something like "Please express the reason the post should be deleted as descriptively and concisely as possible, with as little fluff as possible."
Hmm... maybe "Please express why this post should be deleted in a few sentences as briefly and concisely as possible." could work?
I'd ping evazion but he's bound to see this discussion sooner or later and edit in a fitting line if he agrees with it.
Updated help:upload notice to state that tagging your uploads is mandatory and to link howto:tag, and updated help:flag notice to state that you must give a valid flag reason. Just go ahead and edit the wiki if you think you can word these statements better.
I'm going to try speaking up regarding post #1697836, and also post #2534498, post #2532334, post #2523065, post #2479565, post #2470505, post #2471451, post #1726678, post #2440389, post #2430440, post #2348459, post #1395265, post #2066847 and many more. Some of these have been reapproved, but my point is that they should never have been flagged in the first place. Furthermore, these posts, and any other post, might be flagged again at any time, any number of times, by any registered user, for any alleged flaw whatsoever.
In addition to the things I mentioned in my appeal reasons for the above posts, I want to say that fault-finding flags like these achieve nothing positive. Please, for the sake of Danbooru, stop doing this. I don't go around flagging every image where some minor aspect of style or content isn't to my tastes or up to my personal standards. What's the point of making Danbooru a place where only pictures that no-one objects to are allowed to stay? That means denying the great majority of users a lot of art that they enjoy, and for what gain?
It's bizarre to me, but some users seem to perceive the presence of posts they dislike as unacceptably harmful, instead of simply ignoring them and looking at something they enjoy. What is harmful is to delete parts of our art collection out of resentment (i.e. "They are ruining this site by uploading this crap that doesn't belong here.") or an obsessive need to exercise control for the sake of control (i.e. "This is not broken but I'll go ahead and 'fix' it anyway because I like to feel important.").
I believe that it was a mistake to let any user flag any image for such a wide range of reasons. It's true that the questions of what is and isn't on-topic and Danbooru quality are always open. However, like I said in forum #105289 and forum #105294, it's possible to approach those issues in a positive way, promoting the good instead of trying to stamp out the bad.
So, you might ask, is there anything Flopsy doesn't want to keep on the site? My answer to that is that posts that are patently low-quality (e.g. post #616169, post #2445794, post #876412) and/or off-topic (e.g. post #587440, post #765582, post #1111980) should be speedily deleted, because Danbooru is not Imgur. Such posts are rare and obvious enough that the mod staff should be able to handle them on their own, without flagging assistance from other users. On the other hand, in cases that are about setting the boundaries of content and quality I favor an inclusive approach. I believe that it's more productive, much better for the mood on the site, to handle disagreements about approval policy via open-minded, voluntary debate than via the trench warfare of flags, appeals and demotion campaigns.
You are more or less suggesting 2 things:
1. Stop flagging
2. Stop deleting posts (i.e. more or less no quality control and only for the "really, really awful posts).
You gotta run into problems there.
About the image you are talking about: My flag, and the mouth isn't in my eyes a stylistic way of drawing things (especially with a rectangular tongue (isn't mentioned in the flag)), but indeed a flaw.
Provence said:
You are more or less suggesting 2 things:
1. Stop flagging
2. Stop deleting posts (i.e. more or less no quality control and only for the "really, really awful posts).
You gotta run into problems there.About the image you are talking about: My flag, and the mouth isn't in my eyes a stylistic way of drawing things (especially with a rectangular tongue (isn't mentioned in the flag)), but indeed a flaw.
You mean post #1697836? I don't think that triangle is her tongue there, but rather a guitar pick she's holding in her mouth. It's right there in the tag list.
Nitrogen09 said:
You mean post #1697836? I don't think that triangle is her tongue there, but rather a guitar pick she's holding in her mouth. It's right there in the tag list.
See^^. That's why I didn't mention it in the flag, because I was unsure about what it is and was making an assumption.
Anyway, the point is that "low quality" (see Flopsy's last paragraph) is very subjective and this image falls in my book under "mediocre quality".