Updated
Posted under General
This topic has been locked.
Just appealing a trap on Nagato
An interesting touhou pick
post #2634378
I've checked the posts that were deleted as a result of incident described in forum #130998 and picked some that deserve another chance, in my opinion.
Edit: removed 3 posts that were approved, added 2 new posts.
Edit 2: removed 2 more posts that got approved.
Updated
MyrMindservant said:
I've checked the posts that were deleted as a result of incident described in forum #130998 and picked some that deserve another chance, in my opinion.
Got through some. post #2712018 is a huge maybe, since it's altered from the original scan. I guess I'll give it grace for now since original is a scan, but I am typically not fond of those either unless he knows exactly what he's doing (and infamous typically doesn't in my experience).
And plus, someone needs to tell him to source his scans better. I shouldn't have to look up what issue it is.
I don't see any serious flaws on those.
post #2718419
Textless version is approved, so the post shouldn't have any anatomical issues.
I do not understand why this post was deleted (and especially why 16 moderators didn't approve of it.) A comment even claims it's a "sample" of the original, but it's not- the monitor is clearly different, and other approved child posts have similar minor differences. It's of no worse quality than the parent, other than being of a lower res than child posts (and the same res as the parent.)
Sorry, but the fact this was rejected by so many moderators and all of the given reasons why are completely wrong/inconsistent is just baffling to me. I've never an image deleted like this, whether posted myself or by someone else.
@Sarangpata said:
I do not understand why this post was deleted (and especially why 16 moderators didn't approve of it.) A comment even claims it's a "sample" of the original, but it's not- the monitor is clearly different, and other approved child posts have similar minor differences. It's of no worse quality than the parent, other than being of a lower res than child posts (and the same res as the parent.)
Sorry, but the fact this was rejected by so many moderators and all of the given reasons why are completely wrong/inconsistent is just baffling to me. I've never an image deleted like this, whether posted myself or by someone else.
Hey you're right however there's a better version here: https://daeo4.deviantart.com/art/Futaba-676569241
Up it and make it the parent of the deleted post and I'll approve it for ya.
Speaking of that, I think the detailed rejection message shouldn't be always used and when then it should be double-checked. Because here, it clearly carries some false information and that effects other Janitors. So people who would normally approve a post don't. So I suggest that one should only use this "detailed rejection when 1.) there is a really severe error that not even "poor quality covers and 2.) when it is a sample and the sample tag is not already added by RaisingK's or BrokenEagle's bots. Otherwise it leads to false information (but I think this goes too far off topic now).
No. We could do with less rules regarding that. The detailed rejection is simply just that -- it's a headsup to others and the uploader why not to approve it.
Everyone makes mistakes, having rules in place doesn't mean they're any less likely to happen when there's already a perceived methodology to use them.
chinatsu said:
Hey you're right however there's a better version here: https://daeo4.deviantart.com/art/Futaba-676569241
Up it and make it the parent of the deleted post and I'll approve it for ya.
I did, but it turned out to be the exact same size as the deleted post, only difference is that it's just slightly darker than what I first posted. It's basically a duplicate of a post that shouldn't have been deleted to begin with.
Twitter resamples all images uploaded to the service. See howto:twitter.