Should all grotesque/restricted images be uploaded for approval?

@nonamethanks: Worth noting that the ToS also mention "breasts...

2018-09-24T22:34:34-04:00

Worth noting that the ToS also mention "breasts that are larger than three heads in size". It honestly seems like a pretty good treshhold because huge breasts are not there yet in terms of "always horrible"ness, while a quick glance at gigantic_breasts status:any seems to confirm the worst suspicions. Same with huge ass really.

The problem is getting unrestricted uploaders to calm down in uploading that kind of content - normal members are already restricted by the queue since that kind of stuff has a once in a blue moon chance of getting through, but anyone who's had unlimited upload since a decade ago is basically unstoppable save for flags, and those are only useful to a degree since once you flag too many posts by the same user you're blocked from flagging their posts any further.

For example the first page of huge_ass status:active order:score_asc shows 61 of the last 100 posts as either approved or uploaded by Apollyon. gigantic_breasts status:active order:score_asc shows the usual suspects as well, though nobody seems to have the lead in this case. Good luck enforcing a guideline like this if mods and old builders regularly disregard it.

@Unbreakable: > chinatsu said: > > Why would this be...

2018-09-24T22:12:27-04:00

chinatsu said:

Why would this be relevant particularly for grotesque images but not normal ones? Presumably if someone's discernment can't be trusted to upload grotesque images, they cannot be trusted to upload anything without going through the queue.

I never said it was related to that, it was related to people with unlimited uploading bad shit in general.

@chilled_sake: > Unbreakable said: > > Nobody is perfect...

2018-09-24T22:10:28-04:00

Unbreakable said:

Nobody is perfect though, just because they were good in the past doesn't mean they will still be good now.

Why would this be relevant particularly for grotesque images but not normal ones? Presumably if someone's discernment can't be trusted to upload grotesque images, they cannot be trusted to upload anything without going through the queue.

@Shinjidude: > keonas said: > > Don't say "grotesque"...

2018-09-24T22:02:04-04:00

keonas said:

Don't say "grotesque" proportions, that's 99% subjective :p

I think the "grotesque" here comes directly from howto:upload where it warns against:

"High quality illustrations with mostly good anatomy, but feature grotesquely exaggerated breasts and genitals."

keonas said:

It would actually be easier to set up baselines for something quantifiable like, what i understood this to be, too much gross stuff in an image.

It seems like there was a major re-write of the page in August 2010, but before that, older versions of howto:upload specified an explicit "two heads rule", which was a fairly specific and objective line in the sand. Bending the rules was always occasionally allowable, but it was also written up as pretty much an outright ban back then rather than simply a warning against it.

The definition for gigantic breasts at the time matched the definition upload guide at two-head breast sizes, so the gigantic_breasts and gigantic_penis tags were more or less entirely verboten at and before that point. It seems the year after, the wiki for gigantic_breasts began defining the limit for deletion at three times head size, though howto:upload doesn't explicitly mention this. Gigantic_penis' wiki page apparently still reflects the old "two head" rule.

It looks like topic #2930, topic #8972 (page 7), topic #4188 and topic #6411, were the threads where this was discussed and the policy changed.

What are people's thoughts here? Would it be good to have a clearer definition in the upload guide (maybe the three breasts referenced in gigantic_breasts' wiki entry)? Would we rather to leave it subjective as it currently is? I tend to agree that many of the posts that recently bypassed the queue, and were flagged afterward were pretty obviously over the line either way.

@nonamethanks: Well that's what we are talking about,...

2018-09-24T21:42:47-04:00

Well that's what we are talking about, grotesque proportions as defined in the ToS. They're already quantified there.

@keonas: > nonamethanks said: > > Sorry if I wasn't...

2018-09-24T15:56:17-04:00

nonamethanks said:

Sorry if I wasn't clear, I wasn't talking about guro, but about stuff with grotesque proportions.

Huh, that's something completely different entirely. Don't say "grotesque" proportions, that's 99% subjective :p, bad proportions sort of covers this.
Also, that's an entirely different can of worms, especially considering a lot of artistyles rely on exaggerated proportions. Which, of course, a part of our community consider "grotesque" and a part consider it "art" so, all the previous discussion on the subject ended up nowhere.

It would actually be easier to set up baselines for something quantifiable like, what i understood this to be, too much gross stuff in an image.

@nonamethanks: 2, 4 and 6 are already a thing. 4 in particular...

2018-09-24T02:33:29-04:00

2, 4 and 6 are already a thing. 4 in particular with this and other reports in the same folder, and 6 is already addressed by the existence of the flagging mechanism.

@Blossop: I think we should list our options, and then...

2018-09-24T02:26:34-04:00

I think we should list our options, and then decide which is best. I don't know which of these is feasible, but it seems like we could:
1 Leave things as they are, where (I think) unrestricted users always upload stuff bypassing the queue.
2 Advise unrestricted users to use extra discernment for uploading restricted posts, or else.
3 Advise unrestricted users to upload restricted posts through the queue, or else.
4 Schedule periodic performance reviews for unrestricted users.
5 Get rid of the unrestricted ability altogether.
6 Have certain other users for policing posts with the restricted tags.

@nonamethanks: > keonas said: > > That's only because new...

2018-09-23T20:24:30-04:00

keonas said:

That's only because new users, that don't know about the scrutiny upload random images of this type.
There are a lot of guro artists which are extremely passionate about anatomy and make very detailed images with great shading... but no one's uploading it here because it just gets deleted.

Sorry if I wasn't clear, I wasn't talking about guro, but about stuff with grotesque proportions.

@keonas: > nonamethanks said: > > Those pictures are...

2018-09-23T20:16:48-04:00

nonamethanks said:

Those pictures are honestly usually pretty low quality, so yeah.

That's only because new users, that don't know about the scrutiny upload random images of this type.
There are a lot of guro artists which are extremely passionate about anatomy and make very detailed images with great shading... but no one's uploading it here because it just gets deleted.

@Unbreakable: > Blossop said: > > Aren't users with...

2018-09-23T14:19:14-04:00

Blossop said:

Aren't users with unrestricted uploads chosen because of their discernment?

Nobody is perfect though, just because they were good in the past doesn't mean they will still be good now.

@Blossop: Aren't users with unrestricted uploads chosen...

2018-09-23T13:37:43-04:00

Aren't users with unrestricted uploads chosen because of their discernment?

@feline_lump: > chinatsu said: > > This should not apply for...

2018-09-21T13:53:12-04:00

chinatsu said:

This should not apply for guro images

What makes them different from the other types of restricted images?

@chilled_sake: This should not apply for guro images

2018-09-20T18:43:23-04:00

This should not apply for guro images

@nonamethanks: Those pictures are honestly usually pretty low...

2018-09-20T15:22:43-04:00

Those pictures are honestly usually pretty low quality, so yeah.

@OOZ662: I'm curious if the question were posed as...

2018-09-19T04:13:06-04:00

I'm curious if the question were posed as "should users with unrestricted uploads be allowed to upload 20 posts discouraged by the TOS without entering the queue per day," would the sentiment remain the same?

@chilled_sake: The thing about that higher scrutiny is it's...

2018-09-19T03:55:44-04:00

The thing about that higher scrutiny is it's always taking place. Uploaders should just apply more discernment, and bad cases will be flagged.

@tapnek: No, but they're more likely to be flagged and...

2018-09-19T03:51:07-04:00

No, but they're more likely to be flagged and deleted if they pass the queue.

@lkjh098: The TOS lays out several categories of...

2018-09-18T22:51:12-04:00

The TOS lays out several categories of restricted image, including grotesque, and says that they "may be uploaded, but will be put to a higher level of artistic and qualitative scrutiny than normal, and (if applicable) you must tag them with the corresponding tag."

Does this mean that users with unrestricted uploads privilege should always send those images through the moderation queue, so that the higher level of scrutiny can be applied?