Some rule clarification about nude filters

@freecom: Hi all, I was directed here by a helpful user,...

2017-01-08T01:26:07-05:00

Hi all, I was directed here by a helpful user, so I figured I'll post some questions I have on the subject.

I found a couple of posts (10+ or so) in the dungeon_and_fighter tag that, as an avid player of the game in question, are quite obviously nude filters. The list of posts that I compiled is rather lengthy, so to prevent this post from getting too wall of text-y I opted to exclude it (if anyone wants to see it here I can edit the post).

As of right now, I've only flagged cases where the official_art the edit is based off of already exists on Danbooru, as per the recommendation of the user who linked me here (post #2129910, post #2006340, post #1977574), and I guess I'm on the right track as the mods who re-reviewed those posts deemed them of bad quality, eventually getting them deleted. I've seen a mention on this thread that flags would be better backed by an upload of the original art. Is this preferred, or is a link to the original artwork (without an upload to Danbooru) in the flag reason acceptable enough? Most of the originals in the aforementioned list aren't on Danbooru yet, and to be honest, my upload speed is garbage and I haven't quite figured out how the upload bookmarklet works yet (I chalk that up to missing something probably blatantly obvious and being extremely tired at the moment).

I've been told to give a reason in the comments if I tag something with nude_filter, but if I can leave the same exact reasoning in the flag itself, wouldn't it be more preferable to leave the reason there instead? Not to mention the redundancy of having both at once. Seems like it would help more for visibility's sake, although one would only be able to cover posts slower (1 flag a day vs. 2 comments an hour).

@EB: > Hillside_Moose said: > > I'm against any...

2017-01-04T17:09:36-05:00

Hillside_Moose said:

I'm against any kind of "creative" Photoshop modification, whether it's adding vaginas when there are none, nude filters, or decensoring. "Technical" modifications, such as page-stitching or color-correcting scans, I'm more lenient on.

I agree with all of that.

Also as far as scans go (opinions may differ on this), I don't like third-party detexting or cropping out text, as the text can be useful for identifying the title, character, and/or artist, and viewers knowledgeable in Japanese may want to read or translate the artist's commentary.

@Hillside_Moose: I'm against any kind of "creative" Photoshop...

2017-01-04T16:43:00-05:00

I'm against any kind of "creative" Photoshop modification, whether it's adding vaginas when there are none, nude filters, or decensoring. "Technical" modifications, such as page-stitching or color-correcting scans, I'm more lenient on.

@user_460797: @Hillside_Moose How should posts like post...

2017-01-04T12:33:19-05:00

@Hillside_Moose

How should posts like post #2585351 be treated? It is not a nude filter, but as you can see there is a photoshopped vagina. Should photoshopped posts also be discouraged, just like nude filters?

@Hillside_Moose: post #2487314 isn't a nude filter; it's a...

2016-09-28T00:19:34-04:00

post #2487314 isn't a nude filter; it's a decensor, and an extremely generic one at that. I swear, there must be a template that everyone uses, because the same labia gets copypasta'd on every decensor attempt I've seen.

That said, this isn't a case like Pixiv samples where it would warrant automatic deletion. Nude filters/decensors are highly discouraged (I would personally never approve one) and posting the original would improve your case in a flag, but If NWF Renim approved it I'm not going to push the subject.

@Rxxx: @Provence But there are uncensored images out...

2016-09-27T21:14:34-04:00

@Provence
But there are uncensored images out there with a high quality, quite the same style of the artist, so they look like the original artist (or group) did also an uncensored version.

By the rule you quoted such high quality image could still be deleted by suspicion it might be low quality. Even when it is not.

I presume, when someone does a uncensor and the image has a high quality standard, it usually would be approved here.

Like, there is one censor method that is the easiest to uncensor: the original artist creates a box, say 30x40 Pixel, and inverts the colours, using that as censor, usually the Japanese rules accept that as censor. But anyone with a few skills in Photoshop or GIMP can undo such a censoring and create a high quality image in 100% style and quality or the original artist. Even I did one uncensor like that, and wanted to upload it to one booru, but it was ages ago and at that time I had not bothered with getting to know all the rules, I just ask in a forum and they said "sounds good, upload it and we will see", but currently I cannot recall what it filename was. md5sum random name is not something I can recall.

@user_460797: > tapnek said: > > It's most likely a third...

2016-09-27T20:32:48-04:00

tapnek said:

It's most likely a third party edit so I guess that would be acceptable.

"Nude Filter: Images that have been edited by someone other than the original creator to remove clothing or censorship. These typically feature crude drawings of breasts or genitalia laid on top of the original image."

-Terms of Service

The words I marked are in my book a third party edit and nude filters are always done by third party people.
Well, calling @Hillside_Moose since he/she ended this discussion some weeks ago and @NWF_Renim since the post in question is post #2487314 (note: The post was flagged and approved before the other posts were uploaded).

@tapnek: It's most likely a third party edit so I guess...

2016-09-27T20:27:47-04:00

It's most likely a third party edit so I guess that would be acceptable.

@user_460797: Is there now a hard ban against nude filters if...

2016-09-27T19:49:22-04:00

Is there now a hard ban against nude filters if the original post can be found and is posted here?
That means should the nude filter post then be flagged and deleted under any circumstances?

@NWF_Renim: > S1eth said: > > How does this affect TAGGING...

2016-07-15T11:19:19-04:00

S1eth said:

How does this affect TAGGING images as nude filter, adding or removing the tag from an image without proof?

Some tags do ask that users explain why they're adding the tag, frequently they don't, but that in itself as far as I recall hasn't resulted in a ban. Regardless of that though it has always been standard practice for all tags that if a user is shown to be consistently adding or removing tags incorrectly that they'd receive a warning over it. If the user continued afterwards they'd receive a ban for tag vandalism.

Flagging an image though should be more detailed in why they're flagging to begin with. Particularly if said reason may require mods to have to look around to spot details in the image.

@S1eth: > NWF_Renim said: > > I'm going to ask that at...

2016-07-15T09:35:18-04:00

NWF_Renim said:

I'm going to ask that at least two things are implemented to prevent witch hunting over nude filters.

1) Nude filter is not a valid reason to flag a post on it's own, it has to be nude filter and pointing out at least one or two areas on the image that identify the image as such. The details can either be pointed out in the comments or in the flagging itself, but just stating "nude filter" on its own should not be allowed. If the user can state it's a nude filter, then should easily be able to point out details.

If a user continues to do this they'll receive a warning. If they continue after the warning they'll receive 1 week ban each time they do it.

2) If a user incorrectly flags as nude filter and gets deleted content that is not a nude filter they'll receive a ban.

First time offense a warning, afterwards 1 month ban each time.

How does this affect TAGGING images as nude filter, adding or removing the tag from an image without proof?

@user_460797: Well, I just updated the wiki page of it and...

2016-07-14T07:53:18-04:00

Well, I just updated the wiki page of it and just quoted what you said there.

But there should be a little message in the TOS as well, because it really is confusing there.

@NWF_Renim: I'm going to ask that at least two things are...

2016-07-14T06:47:45-04:00

I'm going to ask that at least two things are implemented to prevent witch hunting over nude filters.

1) Nude filter is not a valid reason to flag a post on it's own, it has to be nude filter and pointing out at least one or two areas on the image that identify the image as such. The details can either be pointed out in the comments or in the flagging itself, but just stating "nude filter" on its own should not be allowed. If the user can state it's a nude filter, then should easily be able to point out details.

If a user continues to do this they'll receive a warning. If they continue after the warning they'll receive 1 week ban each time they do it.

2) If a user incorrectly flags as nude filter and gets deleted content that is not a nude filter they'll receive a ban.

First time offense a warning, afterwards 1 month ban each time.

@user_460797: The discussion was about the ToS being changed,...

2016-07-14T01:34:36-04:00

The discussion was about the ToS being changed, since I found it pretty unfair that some posts got flagged because of just being nude filter, although this ToS is in place.
Now the new administration decided to not let them allow again.
That's the gist about this whole thread.

@Dbx: We recently changed the ToS to allow nude...

2016-07-13T23:09:14-04:00

We recently changed the ToS to allow nude filters, and now they're getting purged again. Maybe it'd be helpful if this site had polling, with a breakdown based on user level.

@user_460797: So...bumping this again. I just got flagged...

2016-07-13T17:20:48-04:00

So...bumping this again.
I just got flagged some remaining nude filter images here, but there are still some left.

nude_filter -status:deleted
The ones which weren't flagged don't have a parent or are pending approval. What to do about them?

Oh and if someone knows better, please tell if one post was flagged without reason, since I only looked at the tags the post had. So maybe there is one post that isn't a nude filter?

@user_460797: > Hillside_Moose said: > > I'm still with...

2016-04-13T15:08:55-04:00

Hillside_Moose said:

I'm still with jxh2154's decision. There was a post of a "good" nude filter in this thread that was quickly dismantled under scrutiny, which goes to show that only the original artist gets it right.

Hmm, it seems this topic is not over yet.
If this post you mentioned in your first paragraph, this thing would be clear by now but it got eventually approved by Miene.
So it seems that there are approvers on this side who would allow this. This can't get from the table so easily then.

@user_460797: Is it more like "not allowing" them or are you...

2016-04-07T00:00:12-04:00

Is it more like "not allowing" them or are you only taking them on a higher level of observation? Since the latter one would be how I understand this rule since they are, without a doubt a third party edit. But being only a third party edit makes it in my eyes nothing else then colored images like from the artist you posted or post #2320488 (with it's child it's even a re-nude-filter because of the bikini top :o).
So, if I'm understanding this post correctly (I hope at least): If the quality is alright, then there is no reason against having here nude filtered images (since you're comparing another third party edit (which is allowed) to this case).

@Hillside_Moose: I'm still with jxh2154's decision. There was a...

2016-04-06T23:50:16-04:00

I'm still with jxh2154's decision. There was a post of a "good" nude filter in this thread that was quickly dismantled under scrutiny, which goes to show that only the original artist gets it right.

I'm also curious as to why people go through the effort of filtering. If it's a wank you're after, there's plenty of fanart that do a better job. Same with coloring monochrome pages with ugly, flat hues, though once in a blue moon you get something truly excellent like Yamaiwa Shuuhai.

@MyrMindservant: > EB said: > > I wouldn't say they're all that...

2016-04-06T16:09:04-04:00

EB said:

I wouldn't say they're all that different, depending on how big of a third party edit it is. Many are just as undesirable as a nude filter.

The degree of difference and their desirability are arguable, and also vary from case to case, but this was not my point.

Decensoring edits are not part of what we define as nude_filters here. Lumping it all together in the ToS is simply wrong and misleading.
That's why we need to either remove that part or split it into a separate category/point.