123easy said:
"In addition, if a person who is submitting content wishes it for it to be removed, for any reason, within 48 hours, that request will be honored."

So then if someone posts a picture, then goes, "oh crap, artist wants it taken down, submitting request because they talked to me and my bad!" it'll be treated as a normal takedown request from a copyright holder? If it's how I'm understanding it, that's a good change.

It doesn't even have to be a takedown, a FFD will be good too, or, in a pinch, a dmail/email sent to admins.


EDFDarkAngel1 said:
It doesn't even have to be a takedown, a FFD will be good too, or, in a pinch, a dmail/email sent to admins.

Yeah, I understand that. It's that it gets treated like a proper takedown request submitted by the copyright holder, that's what I was getting at. :)


EDFDarkAngel1 said:
It doesn't even have to be a takedown, a FFD will be good too, or, in a pinch, a dmail/email sent to admins.

I also want to specify three points and maybe add to this

1) If they realize it is DNP, and flag it, I believe we should be more lenient on them if we do discipline them, regardless of how long it has been posted (it's going to be deleted no matter what anyway because it is DNP)

2) No punishment should be incurred for flagging something that is not relevant, poor quality, repost or DNP however"

3) If it is illegal content, extremely racist, or extremely profane (such as troll posts) then discipline should be brought down on them no matter what, Especially for posting something they knew was illegal

-edit: This is actually what I've been doing, I just never had it documented really


Rainbow_Dash said:

3) If it is illegal content, extremely racist, or extremely profane (such as troll posts) then discipline should be brought down on them no matter what, Especially for posting something they knew was illegal

-edit: This is actually what I've been doing, I just never had it documented really

But racist is a tag and it shouldn't be censored as long as it qualifies as art :v

Halite
Privileged
3 years ago
2012 ambiguous_gender ariffrazalin canine cute feral fur grey_fur grey_hair hair looking_at_viewer mammal solo wolf

Rating: Safe
Score: 25
User: Halite
Date: May 11, 2013

Racism
anthro ariffrazalin avian bird canine duo humor joke letter male mammal monochrome pigeon racism text wolf

Rating: Safe
Score: 6
User: Halite
Date: May 05, 2013


Conker said:
But racist is a tag and it shouldn't be censored as long as it qualifies as art :v

There's racism, and then there's like, nazi levels of racism, which is closer to what RD means by extremely racist, I think. Think hate speech rather than just minor things like Halite posted.


123easy said:
There's racism, and then there's like, nazi levels of racism, which is closer to what RD means by extremely racist

But this site allows nazi style racism...
anthro clothing dark devilshaven disney donald_duck feral group jewish male mickey_mouse nazi pluto_(disney) racism religion swastika uniform

Rating: Safe
Score: 4
User: Munkelzahn
Date: October 19, 2010


Conker said:
But this site allows nazi style racism...
anthro clothing dark devilshaven disney donald_duck feral group jewish male mickey_mouse nazi pluto_(disney) racism religion swastika uniform

Rating: Safe
Score: 4
User: Munkelzahn
Date: October 19, 2010

Incorrect. That's an artistic depiction of nazi style racism. It doesn't go too far into extremes (for example, it could have been Mickey revelling in the strewn guts of Donald, his carcass torn to shreds by a bloodied Pluto... ._.) or hate speech directed at someone or a group- If for example, Mickey were saying, "Kill that Jew!" I doubt that that image would be allowed.

@Peekaboo: I think it's more of a "is something not relevant to the site and you flagged it to bring it to our attention? Thanks, but we don't need your help on that. This said, we're not going to slam you with a punishment for trying to be helpful, either." sorta thing. Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, RD.


Rainbow_Dash said:
1) If they realize it is DNP, and flag it, I believe we should be more lenient on them if we do discipline them, regardless of how long it has been posted (it's going to be deleted no matter what anyway because it is DNP)

This is how we've always done things. If they flag it, then obviously they know they messed up, so punishing them is pointless.

Rainbow_Dash said:
2) No punishment should be incurred for flagging something that is not relevant, poor quality

Cannot disagree enough. I don't want people flagging things just because they personally don't think it belongs here. If they want to be a part of quality control, they can become mods.

Rainbow_Dash said:
3) If it is illegal content, extremely racist, or extremely profane (such as troll posts) then discipline should be brought down on them no matter what, Especially for posting something they knew was illegal

Also something we've always done (except for the profane part. Curse words shouldn't affect whether or not something is approved).


123easy said:
Mickey were saying, "Kill that Jew!" I doubt that that image would be allowed.

1. It was a joke
2. Even if Micky said "kill the jew" if its the same image, I doubt it would be deleted.


Conker, surprisingly, is correct. Mickey saying "kill the jew", so long as the image is artistic and not just simply there to be a racist image, is okay. The admins reserve the right to judge those on a case-by-case basis and, as always, users can request a second opinion via the Contact Us page, or via the CoC.

Ippiki is also right all on all his points. I would consider illegal content to be something like drug use (as outline in the CoC), or posting child porn.

Peekaboo, you show me where the backseat moderators are doing some backseat moderating, and we'll take care of them :)


Peekaboo said:
It's not that I'm worried about not reporting them, what I'm worried about is that such a rule change would make it alright for people to flag stuff for being "not relevant to the site", which a lot of people already are doing, wrongfully.

Agreed, which, as ippiki said, is why we're not doing it :P


EDFDarkAngel1 said:
It doesn't even have to be a takedown, a FFD will be good too, or, in a pinch, a dmail/email sent to admins.

What about when people abuse this? By say uploading low quality troll images to mess with users, then flags their own image afterwords to avoid being smacked. example: https://e926.net/post/show/415733


Conker said:
What about when people abuse this? By say uploading low quality troll images to mess with users, then flags their own image afterwords to avoid being smacked. example: https://e926.net/post/show/415733

Ippiki also answered that, if the image was clearly targeting someone out of malice, we will still take the image down, and hit the user for trolling. Nothing changed there.


EDFDarkAngel1 said:
Ippiki also answered that, if the image was clearly targeting someone out of malice, we will still take the image down, and hit the user for trolling. Nothing changed there.

Did you even look at the image? Its NOT targeting anyone, they just uploaded a bad image to troll and than flagged it. So does nothing happen to them if they keep doing it....thats my question


Conker said:
Did you even look at the image? Its NOT targeting anyone, they just uploaded a bad image to troll and than flagged it. So does nothing happen to them if they keep doing it....thats my question

I think the admins are smart enough to see when someone does something like that and punish accordingly.


Sollux said:
I think the admins are smart enough to see when someone does something like that and punish accordingly.

No one is perfect, people miss things.


Sollux said:
I think the admins are smart enough to see when someone does something like that and punish accordingly.

It's a case-by-case basis. Even if someone uploads a troll photo, it should provide some lulz for the users for a while :) Nothing wrong with that.


EDFDarkAngel1 said:
It's a case-by-case basis. Even if someone uploads a troll photo, it should provide some lulz for the users for a while :) Nothing wrong with that.

Shit posting....there is something wrong with that. However you didnt answer my question..so again, will users get off with no slap for uploading bad images for trolling for just flagging the image afterwords? yes or no?

Hey

ippiki_ookami

Can you answer my question purrhaps?


Conker said:
Shit posting....there is something wrong with that. However you didnt answer my question..so again, will users get off with no slap for uploading bad images for trolling for just flagging the image afterwords? yes or no?

Hey
Can you answer my question purrhaps?

Actually, I did, you just don't want to accept the answer.

Conker, in the future, please re-consider what you're typing. Based on your current trend, and your tone in this thread, you are very close to violating our Code of Conduct.

Patchi
Privileged
3 years ago
abstract_background anthro blue_eyes brown_hair brown_nose cat eyelashes feline female hair hi_res looking_at_viewer looking_back mammal open_mouth patchi ratte siamese slit_pupils smile solo teeth

Rating: Safe
Score: 77
User: Patchi
Date: July 27, 2013

EDFDarkAngel1 said:
Actually, I did, you just don't want to accept the answer.

Conker, in the future, please re-consider what you're typing. Based on your current trend, and your tone in this thread, you are very close to violating our Code of Conduct.

Oh snap. You best believe in listening to EDF or you don goofed yourself


Conker said:
What about when people abuse this? By say uploading low quality troll images to mess with users, then flags their own image afterwords to avoid being smacked. example: https://e926.net/post/show/415733

EDFDarkAngel1 said:
Ippiki also answered that, if the image was clearly targeting someone out of malice, we will still take the image down, and hit the user for trolling. Nothing changed there.

Conker said:
Did you even look at the image? Its NOT targeting anyone, they just uploaded a bad image to troll and than flagged it. So does nothing happen to them if they keep doing it....thats my question

Sometimes I worry about you.

You should be capable of knowing that EDF said "If we see him doing this on purpose and/or to piss us or others of we'll slap him into submission". Other than that every deletion eats away at his upload limit, somebody couldn't do this forever even if we never hit them, Mario583 could tell you all about this procedure but he was shown the way out already.


NotMeNotYou said:
every deletion eats away at his upload limit, somebody couldn't do this forever even if we never hit them, Mario583 could tell you all about this procedure but he was shown the way out already.

Ture, but isnt the upload limit hard ot lose at first? Isnt it like for every 4 deleted posts you lose 1? I only asked as the small change in flagging ones own image could leave some loop holes. I was just trying to make sure :v


123easy said:
"In addition, if a person who is submitting content wishes it for it to be removed, for any reason, within 48 hours, that request will be honored."

So then if someone posts a picture, then goes, "oh crap, artist wants it taken down, submitting request because they talked to me and my bad!" it'll be treated as a normal takedown request from a copyright holder? If it's how I'm understanding it, that's a good change.

Right, this is something I did every once in a while back when I was lead admin. Sometimes people make mistakes when they upload; they might upload the wrong version of a picture, or upload a larger size that wasn't intended to be public, or simply realize that they shouldn't have uploaded whatever they did in the first place. It's a big hassle for everyone if we force the user to contact the artist/character owner to submit a takedown request for something that the uploader is telling us they mistakenly uploaded to begin with, which I noticed typically happened within 48 hours of the content being posted.

This is simply the formalizing of a practice that we've been engaging in for quite a while now.

Granberia
Contributor
3 years ago
angry anthro axe chest_tuft dialogue disney english_text fur imminent_death lagomorph lol_comments male mammal melee_weapon rabbit rabbit_(winnie_the_pooh) reaction_image sneakerfox solo source_request text threatening tuft weapon winnie_the_pooh_(franchise)

Rating: Safe
Score: 115
User: msc
Date: May 27, 2011

Conker said:
Ture, but isnt the upload limit hard ot lose at first? Isnt it like for every 4 deleted posts you lose 1? I only asked as the small change in flagging ones own image could leave some loop holes. I was just trying to make sure :v

You know that if there was -1 for each deleted upload then your upload limit would be negative, right?


Gilda_The_Gryphon said:
You know that if there was -1 for each deleted upload then your upload limit would be negative, right?

I think a lot of users would be negative by now if it was for every 1 post. I know I have a few just from resized image mistakes ect :v

Halite
Privileged
3 years ago
2012 ambiguous_gender ariffrazalin canine cute feral fur grey_fur grey_hair hair looking_at_viewer mammal solo wolf

Rating: Safe
Score: 25
User: Halite
Date: May 11, 2013

Just a question/request on one of the newer bits.
The wording of this part:

Posting Abuse
Editing/creating post descriptions (if you are not the artist, uploader, character owner, or commissioner) to create information

is a bit confusing, to me at least.

It seems like you're saying no one but artist, uploader, character owner, or commissioner can create or edit descriptions.
Aside from maybe for spelling/grammar level of fixes.
If that's what you're aiming for, it's not bad, but could possibly be a bit cleared, because it also sounds like it possibly means that you aren't allowed to invent information about an image.
Like, you couldn't decide what breed of dog is depicted in an image, and stick that in the description just because you want to.

I may just be getting confused over myself, or over-analyzing it, but I wasn't quite sure what it meant.