Banned artists/paid rewards should only be accessible to Moderator+ users

@Dalamar: I agree with Zupi, paid rewards should not be...

2020-06-25T21:14:58-04:00

I agree with Zupi, paid rewards should not be hidden. If the artist wants it gone nothing is stopping them requesting removal. It's sad to see the morality plague going around has made it here too.

@skylightcrystal: One thing with regards paid content - there are...

2020-06-24T10:14:09-04:00

One thing with regards paid content - there are quite a few cases where a paid version of an image is uploaded to the site, when a free (often lower resolution) version is also available - which then isn't uploaded because it's an inferior version to something already on the site. It's largely for this reason that I stopped refusing to favourite any paid rewards on this site. If paid rewards are to be blocked, then perhaps we should actively seek out these versions of the images that are made freely available by artists to upload for a while before the actual blockage happens, so that people can move their favourites over to this version of the image that continues to be available. Perhaps a notification could be sent out to users regarding this as well, although that could create drama...

Regarding banned art it's always been my view that when an artist actually requests something to be banned then that should be respected properly, and simply sticking an image behind a flimsy paywall is certainly not respecting it properly. If people want to make official art for works where the artist is not the copyright holder (as some have argued in the past) then I don't care about that, but this shouldn't be used as an argument to justify continuing to make the rest of these works available.

@OOZ662: At the very least, I feel that artists that...

2020-06-24T05:49:53-04:00

At the very least, I feel that artists that have directly requested their art to be removed and have been set as banned artists because of it should have their artwork removed from view for any purpose outside duplication detection; whether that means Mod+ or Admin-only access, I'm fine with either. The fact that it could even be interpreted that the site profits off of paywalling art that has had a removal request filed for it is negative in all sorts of ways.

When it comes to paid rewards, it's a slightly more grey area. The argument could be made that uploading any art is theft at its core, stealing clicks and views away from the artist even when the original is posted "for free." I feel our sourcing, tagging, and artist entries do a good job of negating that. However, when the viewer is specifically and directly intended to pay for access to an image and we host it, that's clear-cut piracy. A lot of internet users are obviously okay with that; personally I'm not.

From my point of view the basic reason behind any argument for keeping access open in either case is personal greed, whether it's behind the excuse of a desire for a "perfect" image backup repository or a more direct feeling that one shouldn't have to pay to see pictures.

@Unbreakable: > Ars said: > > If we're gonna be talking...

2020-06-20T22:06:46-04:00

Ars said:

If we're gonna be talking about possibly banning paid rewards, then we should probably clarify something related to it first; should images from sites like patreon/fantia/fanbox/etc be tagged with paid reward even if they're freely available? I've seen posts on here before with the tag even though you don't actually have to pay any money to see the images from their source site and was always bewildered by this.

No, paid reward should only be used if you had/have to pay money to get it.

@Ars: If we're gonna be talking about possibly...

2020-06-20T21:58:55-04:00

If we're gonna be talking about possibly banning paid rewards, then we should probably clarify something related to it first; should images from sites like patreon/fantia/fanbox/etc be tagged with paid reward even if they're freely available? I've seen posts on here before with the tag even though you don't actually have to pay any money to see the images from their source site and was always bewildered by this.

@Dolmatov: I believe that you can add a new function to...

2020-06-20T16:16:45-04:00

I believe that you can add a new function to the description of a blocked artist. This feature is visible and editable only to users with elevated rights, regardless of whether there is a general lock on the artist.

Description of the function.
On the description page, a list of options for accessing content:
Access blocked
Access in the form of blurry pictures is allowed;
Access to previews is allowed only - i.e. access to the full picture is blocked and an even smaller preview is created for pictures the size of a preview.
The second parameter is the ban duration:
Constantly;
X days from the date the picture was uploaded;
X days from the ban date (ban status) - i.e. after the expiration of the ban artist is removed.

By default, a permanent ban on access to the picture at the request of the artist and in the absence of limited access conditions. A notification about the ability to change the level of restrictions should be sent in response to the request of the artist.
Full access with this prohibition is valid for users with content management rights - for example, a moderator to check the correctness of the artist’s tag relative to the image. Alternatively, you can generate a picture of a certain size and quality, sufficient for verification.

/wiki_pages/help%3Ausers
As previously written, no one promised access to such images to paid accounts. I think there’s a request from the administration to send a link to the wiki to the page /user_upgrade/new - it can be made as a separate "help" button in the menu. Perhaps it’s worth creating a separate wiki page "help: user_upgrade" with a mention that the rights (opportunities) of users can be viewed at the link (above), as well as a brief summary about paid accounts.
If paid accounts now have access to banned data beyond the agreed one, then:
Change conditions for new payments.
Older account options have two options:
Leave the current option with access, or deny access and apologize for the inconvenience with the increase in limit levels (compensation).

{(Used google translate for write large comment)}

@nonamethanks: For context, I ran some statistics on the...

2020-06-20T11:12:06-04:00

For context, I ran some statistics on the danbooru BigQuery, here's some interesting results:

We have 326 banned artists, but the number grows to 709 artists with at least one banned post (they probably asked for specific content to be removed but not all of their works).

number of artists with at least one paid reward banned: 29
for game_cg: 22
for doujinshi: 17
for scans: 32
for official art: 44

@nonamethanks: > skylightcrystal said: > > There are plenty...

2020-06-20T04:41:03-04:00

skylightcrystal said:

There are plenty of game cgs, doujinshi pages etc. that are uploaded for free in order to promote the work.

Sure, but that's the minority of what we have. Most are pirated rips or scans uploaded to exhentai and similar sites.
game_cg source:none: 24k posts.
game_cg source:*e*hentai.org*: 3k posts.

scan source:*yande.re*: 10k posts.
scan doujinshi: 8.6k posts

And the vast majority of what's under source:*e*hentai.org* (30k posts) are pirated content (artbooks & doujinshi scans from comiket/reitaisai/similar events).

Then of course there's all the artists that have "do not repost" notices in their accounts. Some even put it in their commentary: see this commentary search or this. These are incomplete results and only show a small fraction, because when commentary was optional most people didn't include it.

As for the grandfather arguments: there's almost 20k gold+ accounts. If a shitstorm like that happens then it will happen regardless of whether new users will be able to see them or not. Of course allowing existing gold accounts to see them makes tools like Decensooru trivial to keep using and demonstrate to further fuel such a shitstorm. One only has to periodically collect all image urls for inaccessible posts from an old account, and there's no way to trace it back to whoever did it.

@skylightcrystal: > nonamethanks said: > > And again, the same...

2020-06-20T04:03:05-04:00

nonamethanks said:

And again, the same kind of argument can be made for doujinshi, scans and game cgs. If paid rewards have to be banned the the rest needs to be too.

There are plenty of game cgs, doujinshi pages etc. that are uploaded for free in order to promote the work.

@nonamethanks: > AngryZapdos said: > > If you want a "real"...

2020-06-20T03:53:17-04:00

AngryZapdos said:

If you want a "real" reason to do this that isn't part of the "be nicer to artists" campaign, then this could potentially prevent Danbooru being the target of a huge shitstorm should motivated people find out that Danbooru essentially offers pirated paid rewards for its own financial gain. Imagine if an artist with the reach of Sakimichan discovered this, became (justifiably) outraged on Twitter and managed to motivate a large number of artists to get their art purged (not banned) from the site. While unlikely, the end result is a big loss of quality art on Danbooru and the potential for related trolling/abuse for years afterwards. A relatively simple change now could nip that problem in the bud.

Banned artists aren't listed anywhere as a perk for gold+, officially it's just loli + shota + toddlercon. Someone looking for that kind of content is more likely to go search for it on Gelbooru or Sankaku than buy an account here just for them.
But besides that, are we talking about paid rewards or all status:banned here? Because paid rewards are 5% of all banned posts. It makes no sense to hide everything else too for that kind of concern, when there's no money to be even hypotetically gained for 95% of those posts.

And again, the same kind of argument can be made for doujinshi, scans and game cg. If one has to be banned the the rest needs to be too.

@AngryZapdos: > Zupi said: > > This topic is bogus. The very...

2020-06-20T02:34:49-04:00

Zupi said:

This topic is bogus. The very nature of this moral concern is conflicting with itself.
While I agree that paid rewards are something should probably be delayed as others have pointed out, taking action purely off of ethics goes against the heart of the site (along with other booru-like branches) to do anything at all about it.

If you want to do it for the sake of showing courtesy to the authors, I'm afraid you're in the wrong. It's disrespectful to reupload art artists haven't given you consent to. Assuming it's fine because they haven't said anything about it is a bogus point that shows you're selectively determining what's moral and what's not. For that matter, bad id posts should all be hidden off the site entirely. Absolutely nobody should be able to see those anymore. You're not taking into account how they feel. Clearly the artist doesn't want anybody to see them for they have gotten rid of their artwork, ignoring the fact that someone else has gone ahead to preserve it indefinitely for everyone else to see.

Is it self-integrity that concerns you? Let's do it the correct way: Nobody gets to upload anything anymore; users are now required to bind their artist accounts (e.g., pixiv, deviantart), and only these users ought to be authorized to upload and delete artwork. Give them full control over how to handle it so that they can do whatever they want anytime, as long as it is their art they're fiddling with.

Danbooru is a big website, but at the end of the day this won't really accomplish anything. There's other pages that also reupload out there, there's even some bigger ones with less "integrity", but I don't think I've ever found anybody complain about that. Users are consumers, they see what they want, enjoy what they get, and move on with their lives. Such is the cruel nature of the internet, it's not something you can really stop.

To close off, I would like for us to through a moral excercise together: How many anime series or manga have you financially supported to have the right to watch or read against those that you have acquired for "free"?

Morality is not a ledge where you're either the bastion of integrity on top or fetid scum down below. It is a sliding scale akin to a mountain, and we are not required to be at its pinnacle. That being said, we can still strive to reach greater heights, and this is an easy way to do so.

For that matter, bad id posts should all be hidden off the site entirely. Absolutely nobody should be able to see those anymore. You're not taking into account how they feel. Clearly the artist doesn't want anybody to see them for they have gotten rid of their artwork, ignoring the fact that someone else has gone ahead to preserve it indefinitely for everyone else to see.

The decision that results in a bad_id tag is not always made by the artist. Plenty of them have had their accounts suspended (especially on sites like Tumblr and Twitter) against their wishes. Trying to sort through all of that is an impossible task that requires knowledge we have no way of obtaining.

If you want a "real" reason to do this that isn't part of the "be nicer to artists" campaign, then this could potentially prevent Danbooru being the target of a huge shitstorm should motivated people find out that Danbooru essentially offers pirated paid rewards for its own financial gain. Imagine if an artist with the reach of Sakimichan discovered this, became (justifiably) outraged on Twitter and managed to motivate a large number of artists to get their art purged (not banned) from the site. While unlikely, the end result is a big loss of quality art on Danbooru and the potential for related trolling/abuse for years afterwards. A relatively simple change now could nip that problem in the bud.

NWF_Renim said:

Personally I think if we're going to be more restrictive on the access of banned content then all existing Gold and Platinum users should be grandfathered to retain access to this content. Striping their access to something that was included (even if not stated) in the features of what they paid for seems wrong as well.

The whole reason I made this topic is because it's wrong to be offering content that artists are selling for free. Usually I would agree that yes, removing features that could have been a deciding factor in one's decision to make a purchase is wrong. However, the premise of a decision motivated as such is inherently wrong to begin with, since it's to see stolen content. I don't exactly have a problem with removing access in this case. That being said, if the only way to proceed is to have a grandfather clause I would begrudgingly accept it.

@Zupi: This topic is bogus. The very nature of this...

2020-06-20T01:38:56-04:00

This topic is bogus. The very nature of this moral concern is conflicting with itself.
While I agree that paid rewards are something should probably be delayed as others have pointed out, taking action purely off of ethics goes against the heart of the site (along with other booru-like branches) to do anything at all about it.

If you want to do it for the sake of showing courtesy to the authors, I'm afraid you're in the wrong. It's disrespectful to reupload art artists haven't given you consent to. Assuming it's fine because they haven't said anything about it is a bogus point that shows you're selectively determining what's moral and what's not. For that matter, bad id posts should all be hidden off the site entirely. Absolutely nobody should be able to see those anymore. You're not taking into account how they feel. Clearly the artist doesn't want anybody to see them for they have gotten rid of their artwork, ignoring the fact that someone else has gone ahead to preserve it indefinitely for everyone else to see.

Is it self-integrity that concerns you? Let's do it the correct way: Nobody gets to upload anything anymore; users are now required to bind their artist accounts (e.g., pixiv, deviantart), and only these users ought to be authorized to upload and delete artwork. Give them full control over how to handle it so that they can do whatever they want anytime, as long as it is their art they're fiddling with.

Danbooru is a big website, but at the end of the day this won't really accomplish anything. There's other pages that also reupload out there, there's even some bigger ones with less "integrity", but I don't think I've ever found anybody complain about that. Users are consumers, they see what they want, enjoy what they get, and move on with their lives. Such is the cruel nature of the internet, it's not something you can really stop.

To close off, I would like for us to through a moral excercise together: How many anime series or manga have you financially supported to have the right to watch or read against those that you have acquired for "free"?

@Kadoya: Yeah I'd be fine if it's either Builder+ or...

2020-06-20T01:38:06-04:00

Yeah I'd be fine if it's either Builder+ or Gold/Plat users that have grandfathered access.

@DeusExCalamus: > NWF_Renim said: > > Personally I think if...

2020-06-19T17:57:44-04:00

NWF_Renim said:

Personally I think if we're going to be more restrictive on the access of banned content then all existing Gold and Platinum users should be grandfathered to retain access to this content. Striping their access to something that was included (even if not stated) in the features of what they paid for seems wrong as well.

Outside of that, I have no issue with these types of uploads being limited to builder+. All user levels at that level and above are those only obtained through contributing to the operations of the site. It would make sense that users who are active in the operations of the site should have access to all the content to aid in their activities.

I'm with Renim on this.

@NWF_Renim: Personally I think if we're going to be more...

2020-06-19T15:58:23-04:00

Personally I think if we're going to be more restrictive on the access of banned content then all existing Gold and Platinum users should be grandfathered to retain access to this content. Striping their access to something that was included (even if not stated) in the features of what they paid for seems wrong as well.

Outside of that, I have no issue with these types of uploads being limited to builder+. All user levels at that level and above are those only obtained through contributing to the operations of the site. It would make sense that users who are active in the operations of the site should have access to all the content to aid in their activities.

@Unbreakable: > nonamethanks said: > > Those people upload...

2020-06-19T14:21:26-04:00

nonamethanks said:

Those people upload it without tagging it in the first point, so no, there would be no difference from their point of view as the time it takes for them to be banned would be the same, and from a member/anonymous perspective the effect would be the same too.

If you put it that way, yes. It would still be a noticeable change for the majority of the site (all gold and platinum users)

@nonamethanks: > Unbreakable said: > > It would certainly...

2020-06-19T14:08:08-04:00

Unbreakable said:

It would certainly defeat the purpose of doing so if only a handful of people (or in the case of approvers only 45 users) on the site can see them.

Those people upload it without tagging it in the first point, so no, there would be no difference from their point of view as the time it takes for them to be banned would be the same, and from a member/anonymous perspective the effect would be the same too.

@Unbreakable: > Kikimaru said: > > The real question is,...

2020-06-19T13:55:51-04:00

Kikimaru said:

The real question is, will any of this actually stop the throwaway accounts uploading Sakimi-chan, etc. banned art?

It would certainly defeat the purpose of doing so if only a handful of people (or in the case of approvers only 45 users) on the site can see them.

@Kikimaru: The real question is, will any of this actually...

2020-06-19T13:40:48-04:00

The real question is, will any of this actually stop the throwaway accounts uploading Sakimi-chan, etc. banned art?

@Provence: > BrokenEagle98 said: > > I'd be fine with...

2020-06-19T06:28:36-04:00

BrokenEagle98 said:

I'd be fine with completely hiding them except for those that are allowed to curate them. In fact, I thought that was the very point of this thread.

But then it shouldn't be Mod+ but Approver+.