Don't ask in too much detail about how I got myself started on going through all (well... eventually) the translation notes history and picking out note vandals. It's just really been a personal peeve, and reporting them individually seemed like a pain to me.
Most of these are ghost accounts, with no activity beyond one or two note deletions (or edits). A lesser number are what seem to be trace (like, to trace a pic) edits, where the text has not changed (the most likely change being the note size, which is not really comparable without reverting).
There may or may be not admin/mod action against these accounts. Whether that happens is of separate merit to me putting these users on watch. If you don't find a point in me doing this, just ignore this thread and don't criticise my wasting of personal time and effort, thanks.
I may go through these at another time, and also add a brief note (hah!) about the type of vandalism: deletion, trace edits, fake translations, etc. Maybe. =.=;;
Yeah, well, one works with what they've got. But I do see the note updates page being the closest thing to being a near-absolute reference for this, if it was able to display all and every change for search criteria.
It'd be most useful for detecting ghost accounts (with only one note edit), but beyond that, a different scanning method would still be necessary.
As it is, I'll just steam on till about the 1000th page and call it enough for a day, I guess.
It may just be confusion about what the Remove button does. I should rename it to Delete and add a confirmation. I can also add a 1 week mandatory registration period like with pool edits (if it doesn't exist already).
Perhaps it will be necessary for me to review all these users' note histories again to separate the wheat from the chaff. The sad thing is, I scanned through 1000 pages, and it's only about a month and a half's worth of notes. T-T
Hm, interesting. I've been keeping a list of vandalists as I encountered them since that thread, and I have about 80, of which 35 is not included in your list. (of aprox. 136, right?) I'm currently about a week behind on the notes.
If you'd like to do any statistics on or sorting of users, I could write up a script or something to collect information from the API.
A confirm button for deletion of notes probably wouldn't hurt. There's been deletions from users with comments and favourites lately, it's plausible that a lot of the deletions are accidental.
albert said: It may just be confusion about what the Remove button does. I should rename it to Delete and add a confirmation. I can also add a 1 week mandatory registration period like with pool edits (if it doesn't exist already).
This may be the case with at least a few people. I've noticed it happening to my notes whenever I put links in them because the text warranted more explaining, and since clicking a link inside the note opens up the edit box...
This makes me wonder if I ought to be checking up on my notes more. Frankly, I'd rather invest my limited Danbooru time into doing new translations than to babysit old ones.
zatchii said: If you'd like to do any statistics on or sorting of users, I could write up a script or something to collect information from the API.
Yes please, whatever works to make the maintenance job easier. I'm not sure I have the patience (or time) to try and do this task again. >x<
A confirm button for deletion of notes probably wouldn't hurt. There's been deletions from users with comments and favourites lately, it's plausible that a lot of the deletions are accidental.
This is also true, and should be less pain-free than restricting note edits for new users. Not that a week of 'doing-nothing' with a new account isn't such a bad idea, what with all the recent flood of terrible new users. I get the urge to stab something everytime I see another "DAT ASS" comment. Seriously.
Soljashy said: Frankly, I'd rather invest my limited Danbooru time into doing new translations than to babysit old ones.
Woah, hold up. Lots of stuff here, but I'm not sure what I'm supposed to be doing with it. I don't want to blanket-ban everyone on the list (and that would take me a long time as I'd have to do it one by one) because unless your system is perfect, some of these could be genuine mistakes, not vandalism. And checking every single one myself and contacting them and following up and etc...
Example: very first one I clicked on, http://danbooru.me/user/show/121943. One edit, which didn't change anything. He probably just resized the note or re-saved it by accident. Certainly that's nothing to punish someone for. How many others on your list are essentially the same thing? And how many are single accidental deletions, etc.
I appreciate the effort, and certainly the sentiment, but knowing what to do with it all is the problem.
I know it's a big dump of stuff. I'm not asking anything in particular to be done about these people in terms of disciplinary action.
Especially now that the possibility has been raised that almost all of these one-off deletions could've been mistakes, it's definitely not fair to blanket-ban.
Nor am I saying that the system is perfect. It was a completely manual task, and thus, human error in my judgment is also highly in question.
All that I really want to do, I guess, was to point out that these things are happening under the hood, and to determine whether they're malicious or not.
Of course, as it stands, it seems that more cushioning is needed for the average folk of Danbooru so that they don't trigger warning alarms in the members that maintain this place.
Lalaca said: Especially now that the possibility has been raised that almost all of these one-off deletions could've been mistakes, it's definitely not fair to blanket-ban.
Not that it solves the problem (and I think you're already aware), but definitely remember that any repeat vandalism you see can be reported to me or any other mod too. Or you can leave a negative record if you're sure it's vandalism. I've followed up on some of those in the records list with bans lately.
If you have a way of limiting only to those who have deleted 5 or more without contributing anything else, that'd be suitably suspicious to warrant more attention.
And even one change can warrant disciplinary action if it's a clear fake translation, although that'd be hard to discern without looking at every single image...
jxh2154 said: Or you can leave a negative record if you're sure it's vandalism.
That was what kept me from recording each and every one of these deletion instances. They were by multiple accounts with seemingly no connection, had no clear pattern, and weren't particularly harmful. It couldn't have been intentional vandalism. But it did annoy me, which is how this thread came to be.
I'll go through these users (including zatchii's list) again sometime today and pick out some that looked like actual vandalism.
User: superDBZman -- Comment: Deletion of content of note, not the note itself. Hard to see as accidental.
User: luna12 -- Comment: Actually not sure what this user's intent was; the character tags were all there with the translations. Could possibly overlook.
