ion288 said:
Reflagging a post that has just been reapproved is flag vandalism.
No, it isn't.
There already is a cooldown of three days between flags.
Posted under General
Chiera said:
No, it isn't.
There already is a cooldown of three days between flags.
It was flagged for bad anatomy four days ago and it got reapproved. Now its been flagged again. For the same thing. That seems like vandalism to me.
Also werent you the one that reported the vandalism in the first place? So wee both agree that it is vandalism but possibly for different reasons?
ion288 said:
It was flagged for bad anatomy four days ago and it got reapproved. Now its been flagged again. For the same thing. That seems like vandalism to me.
Also werent you the one that reported the vandalism in the first place? So wee both agree that it is vandalism but possibly for different reasons?
I think that "Anatomy" is a very poor flag reason is all :3.
And by your logic a post shouldn't be re-flagged for the same reasons?
That doesn't really make sense. I don't think this post should get deleted, but every user is free to flag what they think needs further review. So another objected the Approver an that post and now it's up to the other Approver to look at that post again. With over 9 opinions and probably some more, I think the Approver might stand alone here.
Chiera said:
I think that "Anatomy" is a very poor flag reason is all :3.
Come on, not every single stupid flag immediately counts as “vandalism”. Does a single misrated post count as “rating vandalism” for you? I hope note.
Either way, calling “Anatomy” vandalism is quite a stretch. While it should be more verbose, it’s immediately obvious what was meant because it sure doesn’t mean “Hey, this post has great anatomy”.
kittey said:
Come on, not every single stupid flag immediately counts as “vandalism”. Does a single misrated post count as “rating vandalism” for you? I hope note.
Either way, calling “Anatomy” vandalism is quite a stretch. While it should be more verbose, it’s immediately obvious what was meant because it sure doesn’t mean “Hey, this post has great anatomy”.
I consider this topic also as, well, warning.
Since I don't know who flagged it, I can only hope they will read here that such flags shouldn't become the norm^^. This isn't exactly vandalism, but that's more due to this topic's name that this is assumed when writing here.
I suppose the question is if this is the same user flagging the post again. I flagged post #291402 for grotesque anatomy and poor drawing quality. But it got reapproved and I have to abide by that.
It seems wrong that people can just reflag something they dont like until the approvers miss it/dont care any more.
I think we should either block members from flagging the same post twice or at least have a longer grace period than three days.
ion288 said:
I suppose the question is if this is the same user flagging the post again.
That is not possible.
Anyway, you can't expect that another user knows what and with what reasons another user flagged.
o to call it vandalism when the same post gets flagged twice, even in a very short amount of time and with the same reason seems like a stretch.
There seems to be a lot of flags for bad anatomy on posts with girls with thick thighs or exaggerated buts lately. Exaggerating sexual characteristics in art has been done since the stone age and we definitely have many images with impossibly large breasts.
Currently flagged posts include post #2902471 and post #2620466.
Likewise post #2940437 and post #2879339 are anatomically incorrect but not massively so. Is it really something we want to encourage flagging and reflagging over?
P.S. The flag reason on post #2794863, post #2794864 and post #2794865 is false. Cosplay images are allowed and on topic. They can be flagged having bad photography or inferior cosplay but not "off topic".
ion288 said:
There seems to be a lot of flags for bad anatomy on posts with girls with thick thighs or exaggerated buts lately. Exaggerating sexual characteristics in art has been done since the stone age and we definitely have many images with impossibly large breasts.
Currently flagged posts include post #2902471 and post #2620466.
Well, I do agree that there was a current flagging uprise against the approver DetBarkhorn: approver:DetBarkhorn status:flagged
There is also a flagging uprise against the artist robutts: status:flagged robutts.
But then you should primarily ask why this stuff gets flagged and not calling out for vandalism. Maybe there is a reason why this stuff gets flagged and reflagged and one could say that these posts are bordering to the "Grotesque" clause in the ToS:
Grotesque: Any depiction of extreme mutilation, extreme bodily distension, feces, or bodies that are far outside the realm of normal human proportion (for example, breasts that are larger than three heads in size or penises that are larger than two heads in size). Please use the guro tag.
Apparantly, some users think that these posts fall under this clause and then these posts are put under higher scrutiny. If I agree with them...be left open. Vut that's what the ToS says.
But what I highly disagree with is that simply because something is attacked, it isn't automatically vandalism. A lot flags like these go actually through, so maybe one should ask if the uploaders and approvers whose approval get flagged aren't meeting up with quality standards.
Chiera said:
Well, I do agree that there was a current flagging uprise against the approver DetBarkhorn: approver:DetBarkhorn status:flagged
The user won approval rights in the lottery (i.e., randomly chosen), so that’s not too surprising to me.
There is also a flagging uprise against the artist robutts: status:flagged robutts.
The style of many of that artist’s post doesn’t look very anime-esque, which also lowers the chances of reapproval, I guess.
But what I highly disagree with is that simply because something is attacked, it isn't automatically vandalism. A lot flags like these go actually through, so maybe one should ask if the uploaders and approvers whose approval get flagged aren't meeting up with quality standards.
I wouldn’t even call it “attacked”, which implies malice. Maybe someone stumbled upon them and actually cared and was bold enough to do something about it.
kittey said:
I wouldn’t even call it “attacked”, which implies malice. Maybe someone stumbled upon them and actually cared and was bold enough to do something about it.
You're right.
Didn't have this in mind when I wrote this, but I see you're point and how you put it sounds more like the intended meaning I wanted to give my post.
Maybe someone stumbled upon them and actually cared and was bold enough to do something about them
The flags in question are all old images that have been flagged before and failed more than once.
A lot flags like these go actually through, so maybe one should ask if the uploaders and approvers whose approval get flagged aren't meeting up with quality standards.
A fair amount of these flags get contested or get reapproved. Even after numerous changes to hide flagged status visibility from the general user base.
I think the flaggers need to consider consensus instead of hammering an image over and over for minor issues. I would ask if attrition against the approval process can be considered abuse of flagging privileges.
Updated
Squishy said:
The flags in question are all old images that have been flagged before and failed more than once.
And maybe someone else saw the flag while it was still active, agreed with it but saw the post getting re-approved. So they decided to re-flag.
The grandfather clause doesn't exist, so the age of a post is never an argument against a flag and is in fact only trying to draw the attention away from the actual flag reason.
And of course are flags getting contested. But also a lot of normally deleted posts get contested in the appeal topic.
By the way, I don't really see that a lot users are contesting flags. It's almost always only you who has to share something or the uploader of said flagged post. In fact, out of the last 20 appeals, only three appeals were due to flags: http://sonohara.donmai.us/post_appeals
One from you on a post that is still active and one from Apollyon whose post got deleted.
There mostly is a reason why a post is flagged (I don't think of posts like post #2920847 since this flag was due to being salty if my guess is correct about the flagger) and the approvers are looking if the post is truly bad enough. That is the concensus.
Updated
Squishy said:
The flags in question are all old images that have been flagged before and failed more than once.
Neither the age of an image nor its favcount/score should matter in the flagging/reapproval process. You'll notice in fact that most casual users come here for porn and they aren't fazed by jarringly bad anatomy, and some pretty bad posts often get high scores (see: order:score bad_anatomy -parody status:deleted for a few appalling examples).
The flags/appeals history for active posts is not immediately displayed in a post page, and if I personally see something I find disturbingly bad I'm not going to bother to check how many times it's been flagged and reapproved before - I'm just gonna flag it.
And some of the pictures linked above hardly have "minor" issues. I agree that for the cosplay pictures the flags make no sense, but as for two other examples:
post #2940437 is laughably bad. The perspective is completely messed up. The knee is facing the wrong way and the lower and upper body are going in different directions. One upper arm is shorter than the other, and her right breast doesn't even seem to be attached to her torso - it's even missing the clothes texture that the rest of her dress shows.
post #2902471 shows a minuscule waist despite a very wide rest of the body - it's barely as thick as her calves while each of her ass cheeks is larger than her head. It may be normal for that specific artist, but "artstyle" is not really an excuse for bad anatomy.
I'm the flagger for only one of those two, for the record.
Squishy said:
I think the flaggers need to consider consensus instead of hammering an image over and over for minor issues.
How about those nine other queue moderators who thought the picture was not good enough? Danbooru is not a democracy, but this goes both ways. A single user cannot flag the same post twice, but two approvers can keep reapproving the same post if they take turns. Why would several different users be stopped from flagging a post if they all feel it's bad enough to be sent back to the queue?
Squishy said:
A fair amount of these flags get contested or get reapproved. Even after numerous changes to hide flagged status visibility from the general user base.
I think the flaggers need to consider consensus instead of hammering an image over and over for minor issues. I would ask if attrition against the approval process can be considered abuse of flagging privileges.
What exactly do you think constitutes a consensus? The opinions of one or two approvers? It's not like approvers vote among themselves whether to approve everything that gets flagged. One person deciding to reapprove a flagged post isn't equivalent to a collaborative decision.
If an image is being flagged repeatedly, it's evident that multiple people have quibbles with that image, however minor you judge them to be. If enough users flag a divisive post (like that Doom image, post #2430440) that the remaining approvers aren't interested in keeping it, that isn't "abuse"; it just means the system is working as intended.
iridescent_slime said:
What exactly do you think constitutes a consensus? The opinions of one or two approvers? It's not like approvers vote among themselves whether to approve everything that gets flagged. One person deciding to reapprove a flagged post isn't equivalent to a collaborative decision.
If an image is being flagged repeatedly, it's evident that multiple people have quibbles with that image, however minor you judge them to be. If enough users flag a divisive post (like that Doom image, post #2430440) that the remaining approvers aren't interested in keeping it, that isn't "abuse"; it just means the system is working as intended.
To be honest, the system is flawed to the extent that approvers are able to re-approve/undelete a post as often as they want.
But this is a good because that way we can keep keep wrong flags out the door, even if only two approvers are interested in one post.
This should of course only be done with flag reasons that keep being wrong like with those cosplay posts above: post #2794863 etc.
Meaning that I'll probably undelete these images again when I'm able to approve them again (i.e. after 30 days after the approval). I don't like doing this, but it ensures that wrong flag reason, especially against borderline images regarding the ToS, are actually kept.
Updated
ion288 said:
There seems to be a lot of flags for bad anatomy ...
The flagging for "bad anatomy" is becoming ridiculous.
The flaggers in this case are trying to help Danbooru become an even higher-quality collection.
But I think their judgement is often either too strict or flawed. The anatomy errors I've seen flagged are generally small enough that they don't detract from the overall image. Or there isn't an anatomy error at all. Other times, it seems the flaggers simply aren't a fan of the artist's style.
Should an image that has a minor error but other good qualities be on Danbooru or not?
I would say yes. Such an image will be appreciated by many. I'd rather have it be available for them than deleted.
Some possible counterpoints/concerns:
"If the image is good, it will be reapproved". In practice, a number of good images fail to be reapproved. (My impression is that approvers give too much credit to the flags and are too biased about copyright.)
"This is a slippery slope!" I don't think so. If minor errors are flagged less often than they are now, that isn't going to lead to a disastrous quality dip.
"What do you mean by 'minor error'?" Imagine the image is from your favorite copyright/character. Would you still flag the image?
And I don't think that one single flag wave should cause so much trouble.
I hope that the user responsible for this got contacted since all of their flags went re-approved.
Unless this is on a permanent base (like I did and that caused some trouble), I would just let Approvers deal with it and not make a great fuzz about it. All of these flagged posts are re-approved.
john1980 said:
"What do you mean by 'minor error'?" Imagine the image is from your favorite copyright/character. Would you still flag the image?
Can’t speak for others, but I would. I wouldn’t want to see bad art of my favorite copyright/character. If I wanted mediocre art of my favorite copyright/character, I’d browse another ’booru.