There should be a warning message that alerts you that you cannot flag a post for deletion again.

Say I try to flag a post that's already been reapproved. There should be a message that says you cannot unapprove the post.

Also there should be some indicator of unapproval within the post itself, similar to the old "this post has been flagged for deletion".

Granola said: Also there should be some indicator of unapproval within the post itself, similar to the old "this post has been flagged for deletion".

Yeah I'd really like this. Put the same old bar up top, saying something like "this post has been resubmitted to the mod queue"

Interesting.

What about a minimum requirement to send something back to the mod queue? Like, three people must pick it for unapproval before it actually gets sent back?

No, the unapproval process is quick if the picture is good and should be approved. Why would there be a need for three people to be in agreement?

Looks like albert has restricted unapproving to privileged and up users.

NWF_Renim said:
If an image is approved, and then someone puts it back into the queue again, does it reset its status of being hidden to the mods that have already hid it before the first time around?

I don't think it should be possible for people to unapprove previously approved posts in the first place. Unapproval should only be for posts that bypassed the mod queue (i.e. contributor uploads).

evazion said: Looks like albert has restricted unapproving to privileged and up users.

Ah, this is a welcome change, I say.

This is a nice change. So once an image is unapproved, it goes back into the mod queue and sits there for three days until it goes unapproved again?

Will there be a way to tell if an image has been unapproved twice? I can see this causing a lot of new posts in the appeals thread and if there is no indication of an image being unapproved twice, then the cycle will just start again.

I'm not quite sure what you're asking but

albert said:
Once a post has been unapproved once it can't be unapproved again.

Can we have also a different reason for deletion if this happens? Something like:

Unapproved in three days. (flagged)

evazion said:
Looks like albert has restricted unapproving to privileged and up users.

This makes me feel much better. I hate to sound so cynical but I do not trust regular members to know what they are doing. Very few do, and those few tend to earn contributor status eventually.

This feature does not seem to work. I've flagged a few of my own posts to test it out and they've been flagged for almost a week now with no deletion.

Probable bug?

Granola said:
This feature does not seem to work. I've flagged a few of my own posts to test it out and they've been flagged for almost a week now with no deletion.

Probable bug?

::checks his 'hidden' list:: I can't be sure because it doesn't say when they got unapprove-flagged, but I have a number of such images sitting in my hidden images list that I could swear I marked more than 3 days ago.

I checked status:flagged the day this was added, and I think the images that were there at that time are all still present.

That also shows the one which have been re-approved. I don't know if this is intentional however.

I don't get it. What's the advantage of this over the old flagging system?

That it is anonymous, at least from the point of view of a non-mod.

(It is an arguable advantage)

There's a deeper difference in meaning too. Flagging is a status in which any single mod can delete a post, and unapproving is a status in which any single mod can reapprove it.

It turns out that for average or mediocre quality posts, an unapproval is more likely to result in deletion than a deletion flag. There are more chances of nobody liking the post, rather than anyone wanting it gone.

The site is now bandwidth-throttled (to 400MB/min). This only affects users without accounts.

Isn't it anonymous from a mod's standpoint as well?

Granola said: Isn't it anonymous from a mod's standpoint as well?

Yes.

jxh2154 said:
Yes.

Which seems like something that needs to change. Whenever some douchebag decides it'll be funny to send good posts (or worse yet, massive numbers of posts) back to the queue, it ought to be easy for mods to block them