Flag Vandalism

Posted under General

This topic has been locked.

blindVigil

Guaro said:

Good, then I can go around and flag everything for "quality".
It's a useless reason, that doesn't provide anything. If the flag-reason box is only there so someone can write "quality" in it, then we can also just use a checkbox, because it makes the whole "providing a flagging reason" pointless. As an approver, who has to check 100 flags per day, it would be a bit more useful, to have a real flag reason to check for. One word isn't helpful at all.

Okay, so you think that person has done something wrong? Because you think it's a "useless reason", is it an invalid reason? If it's not invalid, then it's not vandalism. I'm not an approver, so I'm sure my opinion means nothing, but I would much rather people not leave it blank just so more people can complain because a reason wasn't even given. "Quality check" isn't even a different reason, it means the same thing and tells you just as little. It's still being flagged for low quality, it just sounds nicer.

Nacha

blindVigil said:

Okay, so you think that person has done something wrong? Because you think it's a "useless reason", is it an invalid reason? If it's not invalid, then it's not vandalism. I'm not an approver, so I'm sure my opinion means nothing, but I would much rather people not leave it blank just so more people can complain because a reason wasn't even given. "Quality check" isn't even a different reason, it means the same thing and tells you just as little. It's still being flagged for low quality, it just sounds nicer.

See my edit.
Quality check isn't used as much as people complain about. But it's the lowest we should go when flagging. As I said, just my opinion.

blindVigil

Guaro said:

See my edit.
Quality check isn't used as much as people complain about. But it's the lowest we should go when flagging. As I said, just my opinion.

Guaro said:

Edit: "Quality" can mean anything. It can mean a whole "poor quality" flag, it could be "quality check", "questionable quality" etc. I just think, that we shouldn't go down to a level, where people only use "quality" as a whole flag reason. Just my opinion. I also didn't write it here, because of pure vandalism, but I won't start a new forum topic because of this.

It really can't. There's no guessing needed, it means one thing. You're not going to flag something for good quality, if the word quality comes up at all when flagging, it can only mean one thing: It's not good enough. "Quality check" "poor quality" "mediocre quality" "questionable quality" and "quality" all mean exactly the same thing: "I don't think the overall quality of this post is good enough to be approved." If one is redundant, they're all redundant. But I don't agree that they are, because a blank reason is a situation where you just have to guess what they flagged it for.

Nacha

Maybe it's what I (maybe wrongly) noticed or maybe because you're not an approver, but in most cases I noticed: "poor quality" is a reason used on extraodinary bad post, while "quality check" is a reason used on "mediocre" or "questionable" images. I do believe, there is a difference and it is helpful when checking flagged images. As I said: it's just my opinion on what is the lowest we should go.

Provence

blindVigil said:

How is that vandalism though? Citing quality as the flagging reason seems as valid as any given danbooru's whole deal is "archiving high quality art".

In the end, both is the same.
If I write "Quality" in this context, then I mean the quality need to be checked and isn't up to scrutiny.

We really don't need to blow this outta the water.

Hyozen

From my personal experience, writing anything different from "quality check" only makes any difference if it's there to point out something not so obvious that the approvers could possibly overlook or not see from the thumbnail, other than that, the flag reason is mostly irrelevant.

Nell

post #5278581 should be/remain flagged, but on the basis of being extreme fetish content, not "quality check". The parent image was not also flagged for quality, and the only difference between the two images is the added smell, so evidently quality is not the reason for the flag. I don't know if a invalid reason counts as abuse in and of itself, but in light of the coincidental discussion a week ago above, maybe it's worth encouraging flaggers to keep their reasons relevant.

Updated by Nell

kittey

Nell said:

The parent image was not also flagged for quality, and the only difference between the two images is the added smell, so evidently quality is not the reason for the flag.

It could be argued that the added smell is detrimental to the overall quality of the post…

Seasoned Danbooru users will often only flag one post of a set of similar posts in order to find out if the content is deletion-worthy or not. If the flagged posts ends up deleted, they flag the other posts in the set. The point is not to unnecessarily flood the mod queue with duplicate content if it gets reapproved anyway.

CoreMack

post #5110139 and children
"Artist Harassments Ban evasion stolen character"
"Stolen character, Artist harassments ban evasion"
"Stolen character against artist permission artist harassments"
"Stolen character and artist harassments"

Updated by a moderator

1 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 70