post #7787026 and faux-democratic ratings in general

This was originally prompted by post #7787026 but it has come up again through the rating of posts like post #11251386, post #11093893, post #11244578. There was some discussion back and forth (with some users being more reasonable about disagreements than other), but people keep trying to shut it down with a "there's some disagreement so this is S", with user #1132913 even quoting howto:rate:

• Anything you're not sure is safe enough for rating:general. When in doubt, use rating:sensitive.

I don't know what the precise goal of this was when it was written, but I doubt it was to say that a single disagreement means it has to be S, which is what people seem to try to use it for. It does make sense when an individual is trying to figure out the rating for something, but it stops making sense when there's a discussion about it going on, and is just used to shut down any discussion. This same thing happened in comment #2589387.

What the final decision ends up being obviously doesn't matter, but I'd like for it to at least make a bit of sense. We ridicule tags that have turned into pet tags because one or two people suddenly started mass-gardening and expanding their scope, but when one or two people with a weird sense of what's sexual (post #11235458 got rerated for "midriff", really?) suddenly start disputing ratings en-masse we just have to accept that it's disputed and thus rated stricter? Yeah I dont' buy it. People regularly joke about rating:halal, and if rating:g should become that then by all means, it just shouldn't be decided by some builders.

I don't have any input on the particular examples (though definitely agree one minor disagreement shouldn't automatically make something S), but do find that we tend to be a bit conservative with rating:S sometimes in a way that isn't reflective of the real world. This is something that's bugged me for a while now, probably since I first joined the site, and I went through my early uploads and found a lot of things I rated S "just in case" that were pretty ridiculous to be rated as such.

I also still think it's insane that accurate fanart of a G/PG-rated movie (post #7911232) can be technically considered S under Danbooru's guidelines.

It's like what was created to fix one extreme (the old Safe rating including very provocative images) has now swung back around to the opposite extreme instead.

It's like, I don't understand what purpose the G/S distinction is supposed to serve if I'm being told in the rating thread that basically 1:1 fanart of a Disney movie for children needs to be rating:s because the mermaid is technically wearing a bikini top and you can see a tiny sliver of breast if you're really focused on looking at boobs.

> I don't know what the precise goal of this was when it was written, but I doubt it was to say that a single disagreement means it has to be S,

I'm not sure why you say "single disagreement", in the picture in comment #2589387 it's 4:1 for S:G. (And I'll add my vote for S if it counts.)

A "single disagreement" would be absurd. I think a small discussion/vote where S doesn't have to get a majority is reasonable, if it doesn't get weaponized by a small number of people but that's not the case.

> people with a weird sense of what's sexual (post #11235458

I wonder if that was just a mistake from @ion288 .

> post #11251386, post #11093893, post #11244578

All 3 general, IMO. (edit: I don't think anymore that all 3 should be rated as general)

This is sure to be a headache to generalize because I believe that everyone who views a post is sure to have a different take on it (whether due to their current mentality or their personal feelings toward specific content). If you think about a G rated post for so long it is definitely possible to find an excuse to make it S.

I don't really think just having a midriff in post #7787026 is enough to rate it as S, rest of the posts should clearly be G rated except maybe post #11244578 due to single off shoulder aspect of it.

reg_panda said in forum #435752:

> I don't know what the precise goal of this was when it was written, but I doubt it was to say that a single disagreement means it has to be S,

I'm not sure why you say "single disagreement", in the picture in comment #2589387 it's 4:1 for S:G. (And I'll add my vote for S if it counts.)

It's actually 6:3 (now 6:4) if you take the comments into account, but yeah, saying only one person disagreed with the G rating on that one is a huge misrepresentation of what actually happened.

> people with a weird sense of what's sexual (post #11235458

I wonder if that was just a mistake from @ion288 .

I wouldn't call that a mistake. There's just enough skin exposed to make it borderline, so someone going through ratings is likely to spot a post like this and raise the rating feeling it would be more appropriate. I'm not going to get into what the rating should be for that post, though.

> post #11251386, post #11093893, post #11244578

All 3 general, IMO.

I think something like post #11251386 is fine for G, but post #11093893 and post #11244578 are definitely not. Close-ups of highly visible cleavage should never be G, and neither should a woman with her shoulders and cleavage exposed while licking her finger. I don't know why a discussion would even be necessary for those last two.

ggraphy said in forum #435763:

This is sure to be a headache to generalize because I believe that everyone who views a post is sure to have a different take on it (whether due to their current mentality or their personal feelings toward specific content). If you think about a G rated post for so long it is definitely possible to find an excuse to make it S.

So for what reason do you think someone might rate something like post #11241912 as S?

The bigger problem is when it happens the other way around: when someone looks at an S post and tries to minimize the factors that would make it S to justify rating it G.

I don't really think just having a midriff in post #7787026 is enough to rate it as S, rest of the posts should clearly be G rated except maybe post #11244578 due to single off shoulder aspect of it.

As explained in the comments, it's not just because the midriff is exposed. It's the presentation as a whole. Not to mention that the groin is visible as well. Just because some of these factors are minor doesn't mean they can't add up.

Also, post #11244578 is off shoulder, not single off shoulder. And that by itself isn't why that post should be S, anyway.

Blank_User said in forum #435765:

I think something like post #11251386 is fine for G, but post #11093893 and post #11244578 are definitely not. Close-ups of highly visible cleavage should never be G,

I'm sorry, those are examples of "highly visible" and "close-ups" of cleavage? You sound like the teachers who dress-code middle schoolers for wearing spaghetti straps, good grief. Feel like it's worth mentioning that if Disney thinks that this this and this are fine to use in marketing for 5 year olds than maybe we're being a little too strict on how much titty is worth a sensitive.

Blank_User said in forum #435765:

I think something like post #11251386 is fine for G, but post #11093893 and post #11244578 are definitely not. Close-ups of highly visible cleavage should never be G, and neither should a woman with her shoulders and cleavage exposed while licking her finger. I don't know why a discussion would even be necessary for those last two.

Right. Referencing and scrutinizing howto:rate I tend to agree with you.

I think howto:rate page should be better, and should be more decisive on the pictures where people disagree.

Also it might be worth it to keep some problematic pictures as examples. E.g. head mod decides if post #11093893 is boob and cleavage focused or not, then put this decision somewhere so everyone could use it in the future.

Blank_User said in forum #435765:

So for what reason do you think someone might rate something like post #11241912 as S?

There is an exception to every rule. I forgot to mention this in my initial post, sorry. When I wrote that, I was thinking off the top of my head your average post, not something like kirby.

As explained in the comments, it's not just because the midriff is exposed. It's the presentation as a whole. Not to mention that the groin is visible as well. Just because some of these factors are minor doesn't mean they can't add up.

I do not think this is the correct way to think about this (details adding up), when I look at the image as a whole I don't see much that can be rated as S however I'd understand if you were not willing to take my opinion on this because I'm not as experienced as others. I've simply provided my point of view. If you were to argue that the image is sensitive because two adult girls are sleeping together that could be counted as yuri though, that could make sense.

Also, post #11244578 is off shoulder, not single off shoulder.

Thank you for the clarification, I initially saw it like that because one shoulder is clearly lower than the other, but the outfit as a whole doesn't have shoulders so it makes sense. Please understand it as the fact that there is one shoulder lower than the other, not the tag.

my opinion is that you could change the ratings of my posts to whatever you want and i wouldn't care because it's simply not worth the time of arguing over this for every single post

Anything you're not sure is safe enough for rating:general. When in doubt, use rating:sensitive.

in fact the way i interpret this quote is "just rate it S because if u rate it G and someone disagrees it will be a waste of time to argue about it so just rate it S yourself so you don't have to waste your time with this"

trapster77 said in forum #435771:

my opinion is that you could change the ratings of my posts to whatever you want and i wouldn't care because it's simply not worth the time of arguing over this for every single post

in fact the way i interpret this quote is "just rate it S because if u rate it G and someone disagrees it will be a waste of time to argue about it so just rate it S yourself so you don't have to waste your time with this"

We shouldn't have this energy when this directly affects people who use safebooru.

trapster77 said in forum #435771:

in fact the way i interpret this quote is "just rate it S because if u rate it G and someone disagrees it will be a waste of time to argue about it so just rate it S yourself so you don't have to waste your time with this"

While this should ideally not be the case, unfortunately this is how it may be interpreted as if the rules on rating as G is too strict. This would basically make the G rating available only for posts such as the aforementioned post #11241912 and at that point I'd wonder how many posts would actually fall under the G rating and if it is really needed.

NiceLittleDan said in forum #435772:

We shouldn't have this energy when this directly affects people who use safebooru.

I would argue that post #7787026 is exactly the type of post Safebooru should have in my opinion, thinking from the perspective of a user.

I'd like to add on that many more people exclusively want to see nonsexual images than you'd think. Not everyone is interested in seeing porn while browsing. Crazy restrictions on rating images are what ruins rating:g. I've seen people complain about too many sexual images on Danbooru and not enough images on Safebooru.

What is the point of having Safebooru when innocent images like post #7787026 are lumped under S? There's nothing sexual or suggestive about that image, the framing is simply two girls lying in bed. They aren't even cuddling that much or crawling all over each other, it's just a midriff.

Ylimegirl said in forum #435767:

I'm sorry, those are examples of "highly visible" and "close-ups" of cleavage? You sound like the teachers who dress-code middle schoolers for wearing spaghetti straps, good grief. Feel like it's worth mentioning that if Disney thinks that this and this are fine to use in marketing for 5 year olds than maybe we're being a little too strict on how much titty is worth a sensitive.

So the fact that I think post #11251386 can be G despite also having cleavage means nothing to you? I understand mitigating factors and that just because something is present or has a certain tag doesn't necessarily mean it needs a higher rating, despite what some users try to claim about me. But those posts look no different from your typical S post. I don't see how these would be considered part of the 1% of cleavage posts that could be rated G.

Also, can we please just focus on the arguments for the ratings themselves? I'm fine with disagreement, but the mudslinging that often occurs in these topics is getting annoying.

ggraphy said in forum #435770:

I do not think this is the correct way to think about this (details adding up), when I look at the image as a whole I don't see much that can be rated as S however I'd understand if you were not willing to take my opinion on this because I'm not as experienced as others. I've simply provided my point of view. If you were to argue that the image is sensitive because two adult girls are sleeping together that could be counted as yuri though, that could make sense.

I didn't say your opinion didn't matter. I said that it wasn't just the midriff on its own that made me think it should be rated S. If it was just the midriff, I would be more open to a G rating. And the yuri is a non-factor. Our rating system doesn't cater to homophobes.

artms said in forum #435774:

What is the point of having Safebooru when innocent images like post #7787026 are lumped under S? There's nothing sexual or suggestive about that image, the framing is simply two girls lying in bed. They aren't even cuddling that much or crawling all over each other, it's just a midriff.

Groin, panty peek, overall presentation. All very minor individually, but the overall vibe seems borderline.

You can argue that we don't need to be so strict for posts like these, but the way our current system is set up, if the rating of a G/S borderline post is controversial, then it should be rated as S. It's better to be a little too strict than not strict enough because this could easily lead into the degradation of rating boundaries over time. The strictness for G/S is to prevent that from happening again.

I don't understand how it's even contentious that post #11093893 or post #11244578 are S. The cleavage is prominent even though it isn't large_breasts.

G is supposed to be conservative, it's stupid that children's show characters like Ariel (Disney) are always going to end up in it, but it is what it is.

NiceLittleDan said in forum #435772:

We shouldn't have this energy when this directly affects people who use safebooru.

safebooru is the censored version of danbooru. if you are using the censored version you can't complain if a post gets censored by mistake or due to someone's subjective interpretation of the complex rating rules. the post is still available on the uncensored danbooru and most completely safe posts are still available on safebooru.

there is just no way to create a safebooru that censors exactly what someone browsing safebooru would want to see and nothing more or less since what is G or not varies from person to person. not just the person rating but also the person browsing.

like... we could keep arguing over this for years and there will be no actionable solution when the root of the problem is "2 users have different opinions on what is G or S" and then it's up to a third user to give their opinion to solve the issue. and pray to god that a 4th or 5th user doesn't show up or you're going to spend like 30 minutes on discord arguing over whether a single post is G or S

with millions of posts, is this really worth doing? like if we were talking about tags, it would be different. because if you don't know the name of a tag and someone tells u "that is lapels" then you can identify lapels in other posts by yourself. but "rating" isn't like tagging. it depends too much on a case by case basis. you can rate lots of posts and ask for lots of opinions on rating and still hesitate and still check the wiki.

we have approver level users arguing over whether something is G or S because it's just not clear cut enough to be something you just learn once and you're done.

i'm sorry dan but to me it's just not worth it. if someone changes the rating on my posts from G to S the worst that will happen is someone on safebooru will see 1 post less.

Blank_User said in forum #435776:

I didn't say your opinion didn't matter. I said that it wasn't just the midriff on its own that made me think it should be rated S. If it was just the midriff, I would be more open to a G rating. And the yuri is a non-factor. Our rating system doesn't cater to homophobes.

I really apologize but I'm staring at this post again and again and at this point I'd agree to disagree with you. If the image is giving you that kind of vibes that you can't really point at, that's a valid way in my opinion because that is how I tag most of my posts anyway and it's really hard to argue off of vibes.

I'd just be vary of throwing words such as homophobes out because they can be easily misinterpreted or taken personally. The yuri was specific to that post, it could be yaoi or hetero (in the context of 1boy and 1girl and any of those could be an argument against that post being rated as G. Once again I would like to state though, I would not have any issue with having post #7787026 on the Safebooru.

trapster77 said in forum #435778:

worst that will happen is someone on safebooru will see 1 post less.

artms said in forum #435774:

I've seen people complain about (...) not enough images on Safebooru.

From the looks of it, It seems like this is not a 1 post thing, It is many posts that could be potential candidates for Safebooru not getting there. If this is as serious as it looks (which I know the quoted image is probably exaggerated but looking at the example posts in the original thread post) at that point it's basically throwing a huge middle finger to the users of Safebooru who are not looking for a fap material but maybe some art references or quality posts and I don't think it is just fair to do that because people are unable to define what is sexual and what is not in general.

Taking a screenshot of people calling for S while not including other people who said it was G (such as myself) is not exactly a fair way to produce a "4:1 S:G ratio"

S is already really broad, no need to push G into sceneryonlyland by removing as much as can possibly be removed from G

ggraphy said in forum #435780:

From the looks of it, It seems like this is not a 1 post thing, It is many posts that could be potential candidates for Safebooru not getting there. If this is as serious as it looks (which I know the quoted image is probably exaggerated but looking at the example posts in the original thread post) at that point it's basically throwing a huge middle finger to the users of Safebooru who are not looking for a fap material but maybe some art references or quality posts and I don't think it is just fair to do that because people are unable to define what is sexual and what is not in general.

i don't use safebooru but if i did i'd rather that posts be over-censored than under-censored

also i just checked safebooru and why are posts in the modqueue visible by default? that doesn't sound safe to me. what if some troll creates a sock account and posts G rated sex?

ggraphy said in forum #435779:

I'd just be vary of throwing words such as homophobes out because they can be easily misinterpreted or taken personally. The yuri was specific to that post, it could be yaoi or hetero (in the context of 1boy and 1girl and any of those could be an argument against that post being rated as G. Once again I would like to state though, I would not have any issue with having post #7787026 on the Safebooru.

Oh, okay. Sorry for the misunderstanding. The "catering to homophobes" part wasn't directed at you, but at people that thought yaoi and yuri were inherently more inappropriate than hetero and thus deserved a higher rating.

All three of those tags can also be used for chaste romantic expressions like hugging, holding hands, etc., so they don't always have to be rated S or higher.

trapster77 said in forum #435783:

i don't use safebooru but if i did i'd rather that posts be over-censored than under-censored

also i just checked safebooru and why are posts in the modqueue visible by default? that doesn't sound safe to me. what if some troll creates a sock account and posts G rated sex?

That's not just a hypothetical. It has happened before, though sometimes with clueless users instead of trolls.

Some tags also cause posts to be hidden on Safebooru regardless of rating so that provides an extra layer of protection, though the people misrating them are also probably less likely to tag them properly.