buehbueh said:

art inspired by japanese artists, anime influenced in style

That includes Avatar:TLA, Korra, and the Boondocks, right?

NWF_Renim said:

Nude filters is another thing where I think the bulk of images will not pass, but it's an issue of quality, and I think there will be situations where it will be of a visual quality that it could be potentially approved. I guess a question to go with this is if someone goes to lengths and essentially traces and redraws the whole character completely and removes their clothing, is that still classified as a nude filter? (Example: post #775611). Also what is the stance on decensoring as a whole, as that seems to be more common and more likely to get approved still, and the current definition of nude filter also encapsulates decensoring.

The vast majority of third-party attempts to "improve" another's artwork are distractingly obvious and not on Yamaiwa Shuuhai's skill level. I would say we should still maintain a very harsh, though not completely uncompromising (exceptions when the untampered version can't be found, too, as I mentioned above, though I think that situation is less common than with the other examples), position on nude filters.

EB said:

The vast majority of third-party attempts to "improve" another's artwork are distractingly obvious and not on Yamaiwa Shuuhai's skill level. I would say we should still maintain a very harsh, though not completely uncompromising (exceptions when the untampered version can't be found, too, as I mentioned above, though I think that situation is less common than with the other examples), position on nude filters.

I have no issues with being harsh on them, I just have issue with being uncompromising. An uncompromising blanket ban has traditionally been the stance taken in regards to them, and I've never felt comfortable with that uncompromising position with no room for exceptions. To be frank I'm surprised we have anything in the nude_filter tag that hadn't been deleted, as for the longest time anything that would receive the tag would also quickly receive a flagging for deletion with it.

I was asked about the ez6 posts. I leaned towards the side of leaving them alone because this particular artist already has a bunch of art on the site and it would be nice to have access to it all in one place. I see that a lot of the guro stuff is pretty extreme however so if some of them ended up getting flagged and deleted I don't think anyone would lose much sleep.

Something about guro being deleted for being guro irks me.

I get not liking content, but that's what blacklists are for.

What's next, all of Space Jin's testicle-crushing pics?
Wokada's bondage pics?
The entire vore tag?

Art that makes one feel uncomfortable has a place on this site; as said before, the metric for deletion should be based on artistic skill & merit.

This is where the feature of default blacklists comes into play for every new member. We can start allowing extreme stuff but if new members really want to see them, we'll just state in wiki page what tags are blacklisted by default so that they can modify it themselves.

Could we have a clear, specific statement about whether guro is against the rules or not? If it's not, then nobody should be flagging pictures just for being guro, and that shouldn't be listed as a valid reason for flagging on the flag dialog.

I'm perfectly okay with guro being allowed, it doesn't bother me. What I'm not okay with is people flouting the rules, and/or things that aren't actually rules being presented in an official capacity as the rules. One of those two things is going on, and needs to stop.

tapnek said:

That includes Avatar:TLA, Korra, and the Boondocks, right?

Yes, as well as any other Japanese influenced copyrights IF well done. This also includes all western artists whose style fits the Danbooru curated vibe. I make the distinction between Nickelodeon/CN cartoon art and N/CN art with an obvious anime influence. For some examples of western properties with anime influence:

Valerian and Laureline and Oban Star Racers, both of which are French-Japanese consortium productions in a japanese vibe, Transformers (a co-Japanese American brand between Tomy and Hasbro) which has had both anime and regular cartoons. Consider that the co-creator of Code Lyoko, went on to Japan afterward, and worked on multiple real anime productions. This doesn't mean that CL is an anime, but it was intended to evoke an anime style anyway.

This contrasts to most of the other shows on Nick/CN. Spongebob does not fit at all, and I remember the superjail one that was floating around on here. Art in those styles shouldn't automatically be rejected though. I remember the Peanuts-Touhou ones in the classic Charles Schulz style (post #1547563), but its content, not its style, makes it on topic. Whether it reaches the quality bar set here is another question.

Though, if we're going to be pedantic, we can discuss the fact that things like Animaniacs and other American properties had Animation partially done through Tokyo Movie Shinsha, or Halo Legends/The Animatrix, both of which are anime compilations for non-anime franchises counts. In this we should consider the former not to as its not intended to be "anime" while the later, because those two properties were reinterpreted as anime, leaves some leverage for those topics in the archive.

We have to include consideration on both the relevance of the subject and the quality of depiction if done in a non-anime style. I would err on non-anime having a place when the art reaches the highest technical degree.

We're probably gonna need a whole section as to what is considered off-topic or not. Like, the new French cartoons Ladybug and Lolirock, which are obviously very anime-influenced, I can see them being accepted. Art only having to do with the Minions and them being in their usual art style would be unacceptable.

hemoglobin said:

What I'm not okay with is people flouting the rules, and/or things that aren't actually rules being presented in an official capacity as the rules. One of those two things is going on, and needs to stop.

This is what we're trying to do: create a proposal for a new set of rules to better reflect today's atmosphere.

tapnek said:
[Suggestion for Prohibited and Restricted Content]

The following may be uploaded but are generally not recommended unless a better copy cannot be found:

If we're including such a category we should make sure that people know about reverse image search machines that can be used to find the original image or higher quality versions.

Useful for images from pixiv (and others): SauceNAO
Other image boards (that might contain a link to the original source): IQDB
General reverse image search machines: Tineye ; Google Image Search by image

possibly more?

SD-DAken said:

If we're including such a category we should make sure that people know about reverse image search machines that can be used to find the original image or higher quality versions.

Useful for images from pixiv (and others): SauceNAO
Other image boards (that might contain a link to the original source): IQDB
General reverse image search machines: Tineye ; Google Image Search by image

possibly more?

There should probably be a forum sticky for that, people come onto the forum asking for the source of images and usually their question would be answered if they knew about reverse image searching.

You listed the most useful ones but some others:
E-Hentai has one, but it's finicky
ASCII2D searches 2chan archives, pixiv, getchu, danbooru, and more sites
http://iisearch.ddo.jp/ mainly for game cgs I think
http://www.doujinshi.org/search/image/ for doujinshi cover pages

hemoglobin said:
Could we have a clear, specific statement about whether guro is against the rules or not? If it's not, then nobody should be flagging pictures just for being guro, and that shouldn't be listed as a valid reason for flagging on the flag dialog.

Please this. There have been so many many many many many many topics about the vagueness of the TOS over a period of atleast five years and we still haven't received a clear yay or nay. I really hope that this time something will change.

Guro

One of the reasons that this vagueness is causing so many problems is that the guro tag itself is inherently vaguely used. Guro is supposed to be a tag for the grotesque and weird that may or may not involve violence and death. Think of works of itou_junji for example. But it now has grown to a catchall-tag that encompasses anything from plain murder, torture or any post that just happens to contain blood. Yes, that last image could be considered a wrongly tagged image, but it doesn't change the fact that opinions are divided on what precisely the definition is of the guro tag.

I made this post some time ago to explain my thoughts on this in more depth and I still think that the artistic part and the bloody-dismemberment-violence-amputee-autopsy part of guro really need to be split up into seperate tags to make this easier to manage. The fact that the gore tag is aliased to the guro tag isn't helping.

Furry

Take these two Shizue images for example: post #2037633 and post #1971274.
Same character, comparable degree of lewdness, and even created by the same artist. Yet one is deleted because of the no-furry rule and the other one isn't.
Furry already has a place on Danbooru, in both the safe and explicit variations: post #1799115 post #1689929 post #1569624 post #1618216
These posts were able to get through the queue because they are well-drawn and fit within the kind of images Danbooru wants to offer.

Even in the proposed revised version of this rule, the only deciding factor whether a furry images stays or not is whether it's explicit or not. And condemning a image merely because it contains a penis or vagina is a bit silly if you ask me. I imagine that the reason the no-furry rule was implemented was to keep out the kind of images that are usually being posted on the yiff boards on the various *chans. I really think that the no-furry rule should be removed and these kind of images should be judged like any other image (on-topic, quailty, content, artistic merit, etc..). That should be sufficient to keep out the badly drawn Sonic OC artist-insertion gangbang images.

I therefore couldn't agree more with buehbueh's proposal to work with various degrees of judgement depending on the subject matter instead of drawing a hard line.

Edit: fixed broken link and fixed sentence structure

☆♪ said:

I think the rules page should strongly emphasize that commonly blacklisted tags / those that are likely to be disturbing to people (e.g. guro, scat, rape) must be properly tagged when uploading.
....
I also think that default blacklisting of the more extreme stuff is a good idea, and I think it should apply to anonymous browsing as well.

+1 to being strict about tagging stuff that bothers people and to applying the default blacklist to anons. To avoid unnecessary friction, it's probably best to give anons a convenient way to disable the blacklist.

albert said:

I see that a lot of the guro stuff is pretty extreme however so if some of them ended up getting flagged and deleted I don't think anyone would lose much sleep.

Not much sleep, but like Kikimaru and others, I don't think quality art should be deleted just because some people really, really hate it. If you simply don't want stuff like that on your site, period, then that's fine and I'll hold my peace.

GabrielWB said:

I really think that the no-furry rule should be removed and these kind of images should be judged like any other image (on-topic, quailty, content, artistic merit, etc..). That should be sufficient to keep out the badly drawn Sonic OC artist-insertion gangbang images.

Yes, exactly. Changing the ToS does not mean opening the gates to an endless crapflood. Why would it? It is a mystery to me, the way those on the other side speak of That One Janitor, Vivian James, the prospect of new approvers, the occasional gore picture and so on as the Harbingers of the Boorupocalypse. Apparently in all seriousness. You people know who you are. In what way precisely are these things going to break Danbooru for you? Why is peaceful coexistence impossible?

So I think everyone is okay with the proposed ToS? I'll try to make a section on what's ontopic and what's not based on buehbueh's posts.

tapnek said:

So I think everyone is okay with the proposed ToS? I'll try to make a section on what's ontopic and what's not based on buehbueh's posts.

Why have the restricted content part in the TOS instead of howto:upload?

Calling it restricted was NWF Renim's idea.

I'm not following why restricted content should not be included along side prohibited content. It will still be possible for a user to get banned over uploading restricted content if they haphazardly upload it, particularly if they continue to upload that which isn't appropriate and are warned about it. For example a user continuing to upload hard translated comic pages despite the originals already existing on the site and continuing to upload them after being warned about it.

It might not be outright prohibited, but you can still get in trouble and risk getting your account banned over it.

NWF_Renim said:

It might not be outright prohibited, but you can still get in trouble and risk getting your account banned over it.

Is uploading low-quality, restricted content more bannable than equally low-quality, unrestricted content?

Dbx said:

Is uploading low-quality, restricted content more bannable than equally low-quality, unrestricted content?

All 3 of the sections listed under tapnek's layout would run higher chances of getting banned than with just persistent low-quality unrestricted content. The first section, the prohibited content, is the fastest track to getting banned, as it deals with content that is not the purpose for this website. The second section deals with content that will face higher scrutiny and will less likely get approved without being higher than normal in quality. As the quality standard will be inherently higher, a user does risk a greater chance of receiving a ban for persistently uploading that content and it not being able to meet that higher standard. The third section is listing out content that inherently damages or alters an image and all carry the stipulation that a better alternative or the original doesn't already exist here. There are some exceptions, but in most cases of alterations (hard translations and third-party watermarks) a user will run the risk of receiving a ban if they persistently upload them and an original already exists and is equal to or superior in quality to their uploads. So even if their copies are of good quality, if they continue to upload them and they're inferior to the originals they are running a higher risk of a ban. Poor compression is a bit of the odd man out, as it specifically refers to something that is bad quality and would probably have the same chances of resulting in a ban as consistently uploading low-quality images to begin with.

One important thing to note is that with prohibited content a user may be banned without a warning to cease and desist, especially with uploading non-anime content. If someone uploaded say porn photos that would be considered as vandalism on the site. With restricted content and low-quality unrestricted content a user will (or should) always be warned to cease and desist before receiving a ban.

If guro and furry restrictions are lifted, at least partially, will that also affect scat? Because to be honest, I'd rather not see a tidal wave of shit posts (quite literally) here, on danbooru, even if they are well-drawn. Also, keep in mind that when something is banned for a long time and then allowed, pendulum will swing the other way, so there'll be A LOT of images depicting previously-restricted topics, to fill the gap.

On another note, if default blacklists are implemented, instructions on turning them off should be very obvious.