Danbooru 2 Issues Topic

torinoko said:

Anyone else wondering if the "It has been reviewed by X moderators. X did not like the post enough to approve it." counter feature is glitched?

Every single time I've seen one, they say they've failed to gain approval from every moderator who saw them, even on pictures that are still up past the three day review period.

The reason it only ever says every moderator that saw it doesn't like it is because if even a single moderator did like it they would approve it. And once it's approved it no longer shows that message.

I think the wording could be made clearer to people who weren't involved in the design process. Perhaps "it has been reviewed by n moderators" should instead be "n moderators have declined to approve it."
"X didn't like it enough to approve it" should definitely be changed to "x dismissed it without comment." All of them didn't like it enough to approve it.

richie said:

I've noticed we have flag & appeals history link.
Not questioning the whole idea, I'd like to point out that it doesn't cope with being still in force anonimity of flaggers.

How, exactly? Appealer's names are visible on the post they're appealing, and the flag history doesn't show names for users below Moderator level. The flag and appeals histories just collect the information you can already see into one place.

If you're talking about the flags/appeals links on your user page, users below Moderator level can't see them on other user's pages. And if you click to see your own flag history, and try substituting another user's ID into the URL, you just get a list of all flags by all users (I was concerned, so I checked).

Is there something privacy-violating about these pages that I overlooked?

The history for appeals and flags has been there for a long time. It just used to be separated into their own links.

fossilnix said:

the flag history doesn't show names for users below Moderator level.

This statement is incorrect. It used to be true, but that changed when the flag history and appeal history were unified.

hemoglobin said:

This statement is incorrect. It used to be true, but that changed when the flag history and appeal history were unified.

Where are you seeing this? I don't see any usernames on http://danbooru.donmai.us/post_flags.

fossilnix said:

Where are you seeing this? I don't see any usernames on http://danbooru.donmai.us/post_flags.

Pick a status:flagged post. See that Flags & Appeals link at the bottom of the sidebar?

EDIT: Creator column removed by the issue #2490 fix.

The improved blacklist feature not only allows selective enable/disable of some/all blacklist entries but also remembers their enabled/disabled state as you navigate across pages, which is great. However, there's been a small oversight -- now, when you land on a new page while you have one or more disabled blacklist entries, the code to count the number of posts associated with the disabled entries gets skipped over, and the gray number next to the blacklist entry reflecting the associated post count remains at zero. Everything else works as expected -- the posts associated with the disabled blacklist entry are initially not hidden, and clicking the blacklist entry will enable/disable the entry and toggle show/hide of corresponding posts.

hemoglobin said:

I think the wording could be made clearer to people who weren't involved in the design process. Perhaps "it has been reviewed by n moderators" should instead be "n moderators have declined to approve it."
"X didn't like it enough to approve it" should definitely be changed to "x dismissed it without comment." All of them didn't like it enough to approve it.

In a way, I think it saying "didn't like it enough" is a stronger indicator of the tastes of the moderators we have. The more neutral it is, the easier it is to hide behind the neutrality. To me, it has actually clarified the idea that, despite how good an artist may be, some people simply don't want certain things in Danbooru. I initially thought (a LONG time ago) this place was going to allow anything as long as it is well done, but it's not the case. Really, it's fine if moderators don't like some things. Besides, it's even in the rules. I'm personally happy that this place doesn't take furry, so Danbooru is a place I feel comfortable at. It's saving a bit of bandwidth too, since we're not just accepting art willy-nilly. Although I'll admit to feeling butt hurt over some artists' images not getting accepted, but I just move on.

My point is that I'd rather know and think "Okay, clearly the moderators don't want this image here." rather than, "Why aren't the moderators looking at the queue?".

Ipsod said:

I'm personally happy that this place doesn't take furry, so Danbooru is a place I feel comfortable at.

Furry is allowed, the rules were changed a week ago.

The Undelete button on posts returns a 403 error (but no message) for me. I can still approve deleted posts however by searching for them and changing the Mode from View to Approve.

Was the delete/undelete ability moved to Mod only when approving was moved to a separate permission?

While working with the API I noticed that e.g. http://danbooru.donmai.us/comments.json?search[post_id]=2097811 will return strange results I don't understand. To really get the comments of a post one has to use group_by=comment e.g. http://danbooru.donmai.us/comments.json?group_by=comment&search[post_id]=2097811 .

Is this expected? If it is it should probably be documented on help:api that you have to use group_by=comment when using search[post_id].

SD-DAken said:

While working with the API I noticed that e.g. http://danbooru.donmai.us/comments.json?search[post_id]=2097811 will return strange results I don't understand. To really get the comments of a post one has to use group_by=comment e.g. http://danbooru.donmai.us/comments.json?group_by=comment&search[post_id]=2097811 .

Is this expected? If it is it should probably be documented on help:api that you have to use group_by=comment when using search[post_id].

Apparently "search[post_id]" is ignored without "group_by=comment", instead just returning the latest posts that have been commented on (i.e. the comment index).

I updated help:api to mention which comment search parameters only work on which mode.

I'm not sure when it got added, but I really appreciate the blacklist quick-disable.

It was added with default blacklists. Pretty nifty feature I have to admit.

Toks said:

Furry is allowed, the rules were changed a week ago.

Here's a deal though. I know that you might not care, but in order to ask a question I need to explain in advance.
Two of my uploads are deleted (or officially - unapproved) and they are not even technically 'furry', more like personification, and still I don't know how am I supposed to think it was a fair decision - just because moderators didn't like 'em was enough a reason to delete them?
I tagged them as best as I could. I tried to follow the rules.

So do you know if (and where, if so) can I make a complain? Because it bothers me a bit. You know, I didn't contribute much but some words of explanation from mods would be at least they could do to make it seem fair. I don't like to feel unfair. I ask you because you seem as a knowledgeable person.

First off, its MLP:FiM material so that won't get you a lot of fans. Second, it doesn't really look that good in my opinion. And third, there's a thread if you want feedback on your uploads.

So again, tapnek, can you lead me as to where I can find it? I prepared a letter and I don't want to post it in the wrong place.

tapnek is referring to topic #7934