I honestly wish "quality check" flaggers would actually elaborate on why.
I more or less view it as a "kiss of death" at this point.
Posted under General
ion288 said:
I used to do more elaborate flags but people got angry at that. Quality check may be vague but its also inoffensive.
In my case I just got tired of writing out what exactly was wrong with the image and just left it up to quality check when the image obviously looks like it needed to be flag. Unfortunately too many people use quality check as a weapon so maybe it's time to retire that flag reason.
post #5534590 "C'mon, you know this is promoting child porn"
Updated by RaisingK
iori98 said:
Unfortunately too many people use quality check as a weapon so maybe it's time to retire that flag reason.
Maybe split it into something like "anatomy check", "coloring check" and "shading check"? Those are to most common reasons for me to not like a post (and may be "lineart check").
Updated
post #5231260 "Loli is the closest thing to it, the author has a history of making straight up CP on twitter."
Dunno what this one is about.
Updated by nonamethanks
post #5582697 and post #5582707 Flagged for being dupes.
Updated by RaisingK
"This is a duplicate post. The original one is from Twitter and has been posted days before." Several images flagged with that reason. Seems that they're mad about being 1upped.
Updated by RaisingK
Nacha said:
"similar images have been uploaded"
Not vandalism: It was flagged by the uploader, who apparently realized too late that they had uploaded basically the same image 10 months ago.
"The rape of berlin should not be mocked"
"It's ugly,why this got approve while My upload more quality than this not? "
Updated by RaisingK
However is flagging sure needs a pair of glasses.
T34-38 said:
However is flagging sure needs a pair of glasses.
@T34-38 Whining about "blindness" in both the comments and the forums isn't an appropriate response.
T34-38 said:
This thread is for tag vandalism. Not for complaining about your uploads getting flagged.