Posted under General
Not really, even an incorrect tag with a note that you weren't sure will be better than no tags. If you make a note that you weren't sure nobody's going to get upset at you, and they will probably attempt to help you correct it if it does happen to be wrong.
post #303204 is a good example of comments used in the manner described in the help page.
Shinjidude said:
I suppose, but measures such as requiring meaningful reasons or providing the flagger's name to the mod community, as we've discussed elsewhere, would do much to address that without completely cutting the system off entirely to the largest part of the community.
My understanding is that right now, none of that is available, and it's impossible for anyone except for the most-high to even see who's responsible for the flagging.
Obviously, that's not good, but it was easier to restrict flagging as a stopgap measure than to deal with that all at once.
The optimal answer, of course, would be to have it not only show who did the flagging, but to give people who review flaggings the option to reverse all the flags done by a certain user, perhaps within a certain timeframe (without preventing those things from being re-flagged, of course, since some might honestly deserve it even if vandalized at random.)
But that's a lot of work to implement, I think.
葉月 said:
I'd rather you kept flagging things. There's way too many cases where things get reapproved where they really shouldn't, that's worrisome.
It's bad either way, though. If posts are getting reapproved when they shouldn't, then as long as that is the case, flagged posts will often end up reapproved and immune to flagging at a later date.
Katajanmarja said:
No doubt you are right -- from the community's point of view.But look at it as a newbie who does not know. With that wording, (s)he might *cough* expect to get feedback from a horde of "obsessive Danbooru fans" whenever posting a meaningful comment about tagging.
True it could probably use some rewording, I'm no wordsmith but something that conveys that someone eventually will most likely attempt to help but not to outright expect it.
葉月 said:
Especially since some contributors (*cough*Mr_GT, Herrmobel*cough*) like to slip in a little bit of horrible amongst their massive uploads, presumably to keep us on our toes.
Well if you want to put a stop to having majority of the shitty post coming from contributors have about giving them a post limit? not sure how it would work on Contributors, but I imagine it being similar to how the member level post limit used to worked but with the flagged for deletion function being used to take away slots from a user. Would it defeat the purpose of going for Contributor level when they too have a limit? Probably yes. Would it make us think a lot more before we posting whatever fits our fancy? Hopefully so. Is this even a good question? You be the judge.
Mr_GT said:
Well if you want to put a stop to having majority of the shitty post coming from contributors have about giving them a post limit?
Hell no. Contributors are expected to have sufficient knowledge of the site, its functions, and what to post here; that's (usually) why they're invited to that level in the first place.
Placing a restriction on an entire level of experienced users just because one or two lack the better judgment of the rest is an overly drastic solution.
If individual Contributors are posting several bad uploads, then they just need to be targeted and demoted to Privileged.
Updated
Apollyon said:
If individual Contributors are found to be posting several bad uploads, then they just need to be targeted and demoted to Privileged.
"Yeah, but demoting a contributor with 10k uploads because he posted some bad pics is kinda stupid" is what someone said a while back (more or less that's what was said).
But I agree with you, whoever it is they should be warned and then demoted if they keep on posting bad stuff.
In principle, that could be automated.
Of course it is better to handle problems like that as individual cases, through discussion and warnings. But contributor accounts could also have a backup formula counting the ratio between posted and deleted or flagged images. If the proportion of low-quality posts went high enough (rather high, I imagine), it would trigger auto-demotion.
As Mr GT asked, would that defeat the purpose of going for contrib level?
Apollyon said:
Placing a restriction on an entire level of experienced users just because one or two lack the better judgment of the rest is an overly drastic solution.
Based on what I've read and seen it's more than just one or two users. Placing a restriction on contributors wouldn't be as drastic as what the mods/janitors did to the entire member level in terms of voting, commenting, etc...
If individual Contributors are posting several bad uploads, then they just need to be targeted and demoted to Privileged.
Demoted them to privileged level wouldn't solve the problem as they still can post unlimitedly. The freedom of being able to post as many pictures as you like means the odds of you slipping up and posting crap is decently high. A limit on how many post you can post a day would reduce that by a certain amount as it make you think long and hard and be extra caution about what you're posting even before one's post. I'm assume that's kinda the point of having it on members maybe we should bring it back to the rest of the user levels.
BTW how would you determine which contributor(s) deserves a demotion? By the overall quality of all their uploads or by how many bad post they uploaded compared to their good post?
Updated
Mr_GT said:
The freedom of being able to post as many pictures as you like means the odds of you slipping up and posting crap is decently high.
I must disagree. The freedom of bypassing the mod queue is what causes Contributors to slip up, not the post limit. Without semi-immediate feedback, it's no wonder people go astray.
Just because you have unlimited posting privileges doesn't mean you have to use them. I only upload a few posts a day because I feel that, in my judgment, only a small amount of the art I find daily is Danbooru-quality (based on what I search for). The lack of posting limits is useful for such things like projects (oekaki musume) or good quality scans of an artbook.
reese said:
Without semi-immediate feedback, it's no wonder people go astray.
Semi-immediate? Shouldn't there be immediate feedback and/or correction if something goes wrong? This actually do bring a question on why do Mod/Janitor delete images they know they wouldn't approve nor getting approved anytime soon on sight?
Just because you have unlimited posting privileges doesn't mean you have to use them.
I'll keep that in mind next time I post something.
The lack of posting limits is useful for such things like projects (oekaki musume) or good quality scans of an artbook.
Not entirely sure about that. I mean you don't have to post all the scans in one sitting if you're the only one who have them in such great quality.
Katajanmarja said:
In principle, that could be automated.
No, it couldn't, besides perhaps alerting mods. Auto-anything based on whatever arbitrary numbers is an *extremely* bad idea, no matter the circumstances.
Mr_GT said:
Well if you want to put a stop to having majority of the shitty post coming from contributors have about giving them a post limit?
How would that solve the problem? The shitty posts come from occasional bad uploads spread amongst many contributors; limiting anyone wouldn't help with that at all. I'm not saying your uploads are generally horribly bad, if they were I'd have you demoted a long time ago. But you are prone to uploading some decidedly substandard stuff.
Mr_GT said:
Based on what I've read and seen it's more than just one or two users. Placing a restriction on contributors wouldn't be as drastic as what the mods/janitors did to the entire member level in terms of voting, commenting, etc...
It would, because it'd basically remove the only distinction between priv and contrib levels. If we can have people trusted enough to have them approve posts, I don't see how we can't have people trusted enough to upload without moderation; we didn't have our judgement granted magically by the heavens either.
That doesn't mean there isn't a problem with many bad posts coming from contributors (there is), or that I have a good idea how to solve it simply. But I don't think killing the entire level is necessarily a good solution. Especially since I'm not exactly clear on how it'd work: you still post without moderation, but have a hard daily limit? That's stupidly limiting, because there's no way around the cap. At least privs can bump theirs arbitrarily high by uploading things that get immediately approved. So in effect you'd make contributors *less* able to upload.
BTW how would you determine which contributor(s) deserves a demotion? By the overall quality of all their uploads or by how many bad post they uploaded compared to their good post?
It depends, a combination of all that. How horrible the individual bad uploads are, what's the overall quality, how often in (absolute numbers) bad things slip through, how much that is in proportion to all uploads. It's definitely not an easy thing to do, and the reason I'm extremely conservative with promoting anyone to the status. Unfortunately not all mods are so cautious, and it makes it extra painful, as now you need to notice someone is a contributor in the first place before determining if what you see is worrying enough to warrant a closer inspection (which takes time, and a lot of it).
Until there's some sort of agreement about this I suppose it's fine to report posts in here every so often.
I get puzzled the more I look at it but it's hard to think it's been intentionally drawn that bad anyway.
I don't even know how to qualify the mispelling error.
I'd say that, in that pic, the only part that couldn't be duly explained as "going for the crazy look" is that hand.
The spelling error is just engrish.
On another note, personally, I'm of the opinion that an image shouldn't be permanently immune from flagging after reapproval. Maybe for a few weeks or a month, sure, but not permanently.
sgcdonmai said:
I'd say that, in that pic, the only part that couldn't be duly explained as "going for the crazy look" is that hand.
The spelling error is just engrish.
The hands don't really strike me after seeing her boy face and considering how bad the image is overall.
The spelling error does qualify for engrish from the look but how the artist managed something this hardcore I wonder.
