post #2066560 needs to be double deleted, the sample isn't corrupted but the full size is.
Posted under General
post #2066560 needs to be double deleted, the sample isn't corrupted but the full size is.
I derped and created it by accident. Meant to search.
Posts done by alicepowder.
Thought about flagging one, then I found all of them at the typical cheap indie eroge "quality" level.
Requesting post #2070911 and post #2070906 to be deleted, uploaded wrong resolution (smaller resolution) than the original one.
post #2070994 - Accidental upload (smaller version of post #2070997)
EDIT: post #2070594 - also an accidental upload (smaller version of post #2071016)
Updated
Request to delete artist #121503 which is the same as artist #110258
artist:kuromadoushi_proto_6-gou - Accident with making a new artist tag.
artist #122236, same as artist #122237.
post #2077032 Corrupted, needs double delete.
What wonderful did I miss with post #2076570, that being lowres artefacted duplicate and posted after the better version not only it's been first approved by eidolon but also my flag was overruled by Log?
Log said:
We don't flag duplicates, a policy that's been in place for 5+ years? but whatever let's just start flagging everything now.
That's not even true, you and RaisingK constantly delete pixiv samples. And sometimes the pixiv sample you delete is of equal quality to the original version and was uploaded before the original (e.g. post #2071116). Whereas with post #2076570, it's of noticeably lower quality than the original and it was uploaded after the original.
Duplicates have always been a sort of grey area. By policy we have pretty much never flagged them, especially when they were posted before the higher quality version has been found / is available (so as to not penalize people unfairly). I agree that pixiv samples are somewhat different, because the higher quality version is typically right there when you're posting (though I guess there's no reason you couldn't find it from a 3rd party.
As for the new moderation system with explicit denial reasons, I almost want "duplicate" to be a reason in itself because it sort of is. There are images that are good quality, that I'm interested in, that don't break rules (we don't flag duplicates), yet I won't approve (we also don't approve duplicates unless they are better). They are specially colored in the queue if tagged to warn us not to approve them without reason, so it'd be nice to be able to note that the only reason you're not approving is because it's a same-size/same quality or lower duplicate.
Shinjidude said:
Duplicates have always been a sort of grey area. By policy we have pretty much never flagged them, especially when they were posted before the higher quality version has been found / is available (so as to not penalize people unfairly).
As much as I remember if post was detected as duplicate in mod queue it (almost) always died there.
Hence my sheer astonishment when it was still accepted.
Toks said:
The same can be said of non-pixiv duplicates. Danbooru has a similarity search on the upload page which is automatic. Example.
Yeah I know that, though it can be overridden for better quality or more original images, no? Say someone gets the sample from an imageboard and uploads it before someone posts the original full size from Pixiv. I'm just mentioning the reason for the precedent in the first place, not to penalize the person who originally finds the image and posts it not knowing there is a better version out there. The precedent precedes this feature, iqdb, and pixiv itself but I don't know it's worth overturning. On the other hand if someone went out of their way to override the similarity warning, then that duplicate (provided it's not a better version) should not be approved. That's the other side of the coin on that rule.
richie said:
As much as I remember if post was detected as duplicate in mod queue it (almost) always died there.
Hence my sheer astonishment when it was still accepted.
If that's the case, yes it'd have been best to be left alone and auto-deleted rather than approved. I don't know that we ever had a policy for going back and flagging them after the fact though. They aren't supposed to get through, but unless it's obviously low quality, I'm not sure we are supposed to go back and toss it back in the queue either.
Shinjidude said:
If that's the case, yes it'd have been best to be left alone and auto-deleted rather than approved. I don't know that we ever had a policy for going back and flagging them after the fact though. They aren't supposed to get through, but unless it's obviously low quality, I'm not sure we are supposed to go back and toss it back in the queue either.
If flagging is an extension of moderation process then why not? If we agree that lower quality duplicates posted after their better versions are eligible for removal then there should be no distinction whether they are deleted in queue or if they somehow passed the queue first (for example because mods are humans and sometimes miss the fact they've accepted the duplicate).
It's not the first time I've flagged such posts, btw.
I accidentally uploaded post #2088197 not sure if it is appropriate so asking if it can be deleted if needed