Mairo
Janitor
7 days ago
2018 3_fingers 3_toes bear bearphones blue_background brown_fur controller dualshock_4 featureless_crotch fur game_controller gaming grizzly_bear happy headphones hi_res male mammal nintendo nintendo_switch obese open_mouth orange_eyes overweight pawpads playing_videogame playstation_4 pocketpaws poof reclining simple_background smaller_version_at_source smile solo toes tongue video_games

Rating: Safe
Score: 27
User: Mairo
Date: March 07, 2018

[Feature] New upload form

In category: Site Bug Reports & Feature Requests

Requested feature overview description.
There was already change made so that users had to select rating when uploading content to avoid false ratings which already caused slight amount of annoyance from the power users and doing any further suggestions have resulted into "guess I would stop uploading then". So rather than proposing just updating current upload form, why not just have both? Put the current upload form next to regular upload link as "Express" upload. This way the power users who know what they are doing, can still do their things without too much friction in the process. Also I would imagine this being trivial to achieve considering that the information send with the form to site should be similar, so most of the changes would be for end user.

As for regular upload form, simplest way of saying what needs to be done is to take what's in the wiki and provide that information to user when it's needed and guide them in the process.

This would mean stuff like following, but not limited to:

  • Have warning if direct URL upload matches sample version. There has been cases where people have even uploaded furaffinity thumbnails because direct URL upload allowed it, then thinking that the feature is busted.
  • Sources being five input fields instead of textbox (or one input field with + to add more) messaging that users can put in more than single source. Checkbox under source input field if there's none available, this would stop the upload and notify user to add in source if they didn't provide one or verify there being none.
  • Instead of huge textbox input for tags, have multiple steps for specific kind of tags. This would include stuff like artist input field with checkbox for unknown and anonymous (cut down posts with no artist tagged or anonymous tagged falsely as anon), genders and amount of characters as chechbox, etc. and lastly have "others" as textbox with link to checklist on wiki. This would be similar to inkbunny approach on things.
  • On rating, explain most common examples right then and there, then provide link to larger page on wiki. Right now there's nothing else than three choises which are identical to many other sites, but which usage isn't.
  • Include fields to add post into pool, set or as parent post and give option to create new one if needed. Right now it is possible to include post into pool, set or parent, but requires knowledge of specific metatag. Having ID input or dropdown field for pools would already make things easier for majority of users without inside knowledge of things, which would cut down "can someone pool?" questions I constantly see.

Why would it be useful?
Problem with current uploading form is that it demands users to have knowledge of many things. How this is currently given to users is with textbox telling them to go to wiki and figure things out there. After this, it relies on users memorizing these things or manually checking on them every time they upload. This can and most likely will cause some users to go where the fence is lowest, doing only the minimal amount of job because all they want is to upload the content, even if tagging and sourcing are the extremely important aspects.

I see a lot of same mistakes made over and over and over again, to the point that it's not just about users being stupid half of the time. Some of these mistakes are of nature that they will take a lot of time from other users to explain and fix.

What part(s) of the site page(s) are affected?

  • Upload form
  • Top panel under posts

Actually nvm.

But I wouldn't want multiple textboxes for tags.


+1 honestly, especially in regards to fields allowing you to add things directly to pools/sets/etc. It makes uploading pool series images much easier.

Also the rest of the details sound great to me, especially in regards to anonymous artists/unknown artists/etc.

Only thing I disagree with is multiple textboxes for tags, feels like it might make things a tad tedious

SnowWolf
Former Staff
7 days ago
black_fur blue_eyes blue_feathers blue_hair equine fan_character feathered_wings feathers female feral flying fur hair hi_res horn mammal multicolored_hair my_little_pony shilokh smile snowdrift snowflake solo star watermark white_feathers winged_unicorn wings

Rating: Safe
Score: 23
User: SnowWolf
Date: July 28, 2012

Where do I sign? Is there a kickstarter? ;)

I, in contrast to others, think multiple text boxes for tag input would be useful At the VERY least for the artist...

That said, the more fields we put in here, the more simplistic people might get-- like going down a checklist rather than generating their own ideas.. . but people often forget basics like gender and species because there are SO many other things on the 'checklist' that people SHOULD add... so... there's benefit either way, to me <3


SnowWolf said:
Where do I sign? Is there a kickstarter? ;)

I, in contrast to others, think multiple text boxes for tag input would be useful At the VERY least for the artist...

That said, the more fields we put in here, the more simplistic people might get-- like going down a checklist rather than generating their own ideas.. . but people often forget basics like gender and species because there are SO many other things on the 'checklist' that people SHOULD add... so... there's benefit either way, to me <3

Fair enough! Rly for me it has its ups and downs; on one hand, it'll make tagging the "basics" easier and more accessible. On the other hand, it might make tagging everything harder so ppl will shy away from tagging as much as they can

Mairo
Janitor
7 days ago
2018 3_fingers 3_toes bear bearphones blue_background brown_fur controller dualshock_4 featureless_crotch fur game_controller gaming grizzly_bear happy headphones hi_res male mammal nintendo nintendo_switch obese open_mouth orange_eyes overweight pawpads playing_videogame playstation_4 pocketpaws poof reclining simple_background smaller_version_at_source smile solo toes tongue video_games

Rating: Safe
Score: 27
User: Mairo
Date: March 07, 2018

AoBird said:
Actually nvm.

But I wouldn't want multiple textboxes for tags.

DiceLovesBeingBlown said:
Only thing I disagree with is multiple textboxes for tags, feels like it might make things a tad tedious

The idea is that this way you have checklist as you go, rather than blank canvas to fill. Also like I said, inkbunny does this similarly and they do also have guidelines towards tagging, so I can only assume that it's working for them at least to some degree. (And of course the one textbox solution would be kept with express upload form which would look like current one)

Also the idea is that some things, like genders for example which should technically be in all images (if none then ambiguous_gender or zero pictured), would be checkboxes, meaning it's much easier for user to simply select what they want with something that they most likely should be tagging regardless of what's uploaded.

Another example would be artist tag, there should always be one, so giving option to write it or check either unknown/anonymous, because there has been posts without any artist tags applied, not even unknown/anonymous. Because any kind of artist tag, even non-romanized japanese one, is better than nothing.

DiceLovesBeingBlown said:
+1 honestly, especially in regards to fields allowing you to add things directly to pools/sets/etc. It makes uploading pool series images much easier.

Funny thing is that you can already do this, pool:1234 during upload and it puts the post into pool ID 1234. That's why implementation of this system sounds so trivial to me.

SnowWolf said:
Where do I sign? Is there a kickstarter? ;)

Donate shekel to noot.


Mairo said:
Funny thing is that you can already do this, pool:1234 during upload and it puts the post into pool ID 1234. That's why implementation of this system sounds so trivial to me.

Huh! Had no idea, thanks for the tip!

I feel implementing it as a feature tho would still be good even if technically possible, cause I feel the more casual users might not know this.


You could always just only use the normal tag box and ignore the checkboxes, right? So it'd just be an optional feature.


I might try to make a mockup of this


DiceLovesBeingBlown said:
Huh! Had no idea, thanks for the tip!

I feel implementing it as a feature tho would still be good even if technically possible, cause I feel the more casual users might not know this.

You can also do child:1234 which is great for bvas reposts.

leomole
Privileged
6 days ago
2014 ambiguous_gender anthro bottle bottomless cat chair clothed clothing computer desk feline fur girly headphones hoodie inside jailbird leaning leaning_back legwear liam looking_at_viewer looking_back mammal reclining sitting smile socks solo tan_fur

Rating: Safe
Score: 125
User: Onii-chan
Date: May 09, 2014

+1. A more detailed upload page would improve tagging by a lot.

URL checking: very helpful. Getting the best version can be tricky and most users have not read and mastered howto:sites and sources.

Smart source fields: very important. Ideally it would detect direct links only and prompt for a link to the actual submission.

Guided tagging: yes! Tag categories and clickable tags make things so much easier. I suggested something similar here: https://e621.net/forum/show/255964.

Pool/set/parent fields: I don't think this is critical but if its a common issue then sure.

SnowWolf said:
the more fields we put in here, the more simplistic people might get

I think you're right but it's still worth it. Some uploaders will start tagging less but most uploaders, especially new ones, will end up tagging more.


+1 This seems like it'd be pretty helpful. I support it, so long as the current upload form remains available and unchanged from how it is now (besides being called the 'express upload').

mabit
Member
6 days ago
2018 anthro balls beach belly big_belly blush boar brown_fur digital_media_(artwork) erection fur genital_focus hair humanoid_penis mabit male mammal nude outside overweight penis porcine seaside smile solo teeth tusks uncut

Rating: Explicit
Score: 17
User: mabit
Date: April 04, 2018

Yes, please

Mairo
Janitor
6 days ago
2018 3_fingers 3_toes bear bearphones blue_background brown_fur controller dualshock_4 featureless_crotch fur game_controller gaming grizzly_bear happy headphones hi_res male mammal nintendo nintendo_switch obese open_mouth orange_eyes overweight pawpads playing_videogame playstation_4 pocketpaws poof reclining simple_background smaller_version_at_source smile solo toes tongue video_games

Rating: Safe
Score: 27
User: Mairo
Date: March 07, 2018

Actually bit glad how much this idea is liked. I though this was only me because I see so many small mistakes which are constantly repeated and taking up my time I could use elsewhere.

darryus said:
You could always just only use the normal tag box and ignore the checkboxes, right? So it'd just be an optional feature.

Reason why we have 4 tag minimum in rules is because there are posts where it can be near impossible to figure out more than 4 tags to insert. Preferabely all posts would have way much more tags than 4 and we have so absurd amount of tags that it should also be really easy thing for anything that isn't just pure white image.

So because of this and because we are talking about changing the form alone, it would be pretty impossible to make any automation to this, other than just giving as much information as possible. So basically you with the current idea, you should be able to just input all the tags into other tags textbox and upload or use the currently in place uploading form instead.

Lance_Armstrong said:
I might try to make a mockup of this

Shared mockup with staff on discord yesterday, which I made in few minutes:
https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/432280999293091872/446424959376687104/chrome_2018-05-17_00-21-29.png

Do keep in mind that this really was just something made in few minutes, so there are mistakes and things that most definitely still need changing/improving, but that's the basic vision.

leomole said:
URL checking: very helpful. Getting the best version can be tricky and most users have not read and mastered howto:sites and sources.

Smart source fields: very important. Ideally it would detect direct links only and prompt for a link to the actual submission.

Would need to check these things with Kira on what's actually even possible in this reality. Checking patterns in real time inside input field should be and site does have some level of automatic filling based on given source URLs, that's why if someone uploads from furaffinity using direct URL field, the source field does also have artists gallery link, but is missing submission page because that cannot be reversed from direct URL.

So how would smart source field work exactly? It detects direct URL being from inkbunny and starts flashing with example of needed URL in source section?

leomole
Privileged
6 days ago
2014 ambiguous_gender anthro bottle bottomless cat chair clothed clothing computer desk feline fur girly headphones hoodie inside jailbird leaning leaning_back legwear liam looking_at_viewer looking_back mammal reclining sitting smile socks solo tan_fur

Rating: Safe
Score: 125
User: Onii-chan
Date: May 09, 2014

Mairo said:
So how would smart source field work exactly? It detects direct URL being from inkbunny and starts flashing with example of needed URL in source section?

Pretty much yeah. The Upload from URL example should be a direct URL like https://data.site.com/file/#####.png. The Source URL example should be https://www.site.com/post/###. If the user enters a direct URL (https://data.site.com/file/#####.png) or gallery URL (https://www.site.com/artist) instead of a proper source URL it should automatically add a source field and emphasize the example https://www.site.com/post/### by changing text color or something.

An even smarter system might be site specific, for example if the user is uploading from https://d.facdn.net/art/artist/#####.png it could change the Source URL example to https://www.furaffinity.net/view/###. This makes it very clear what kind of source we're looking for.

Munkelzahn
Privileged
4 days ago
69_position 9/11 aircraft airplane animate_inanimate anthro anthrofied avian balls beak bird blue_background blue_feathers building cloud cum cumshot cunnilingus ejaculation english_text erection feathers fellatio female glans grey_body group holding_penis humanoid_penis humor johnny_ryan living_aircraft living_machine lol_comments long_tongue machine male male/female markings masturbation ms_paint not_furry_focus nude oral orgasm outside penile_masturbation penis pubes public pussy red_markings sex simple_background sky skyscraper tail_feathers text tongue toony vaginal voyeur what white_body why

Rating: Explicit
Score: -1109
User: Munkelzahn
Date: September 16, 2013

Thank you for this idea.

In my opinion, sources are the single most important thing on a post.
You can always add new tags quickly (even if lack of tags makes posts hard to find later), but finding the source after a year can be a real bitch.

In addition to requiring a post URL like https://www.furaffinity.net/view/###
it would be nice if the direct image link were *also* required for some sites.

Like Tumblr.
When a Tumblr post gets deleted, the direct image link remains active.
So you can still upload the BVATS even if the post has been deleted.

It's the same for Deviantart.