Request: I was looking for a way to place comments in the blacklist as done in say javascript with '//', Python with '#' to explain a given line to oneself.

This would help clarify things after long periods after perhaps tastes and/or tagging practices have changed.

ragswift said:
Request: I was looking for a way to place comments in the blacklist

Workaround: use_no_spaces and then put it on a separate line, that'll blacklist a not existing tag.

Should look like

bbmbbf-because_I_dislike_his_dialog
or
bbmbbf_pikachu-oh_god_make_it_stop

Request(?): Tag-merging. Sometimes there's a duplicate image but it has better tags on it than the older one. Mods should have a tickbox that lets tags on a post with a duplicate-complaint ticket be moved over to the post that's kept.

ragswift said:
Request(?): Tag-merging. Sometimes there's a duplicate image but it has better tags on it than the older one. Mods should have a tickbox that lets tags on a post with a duplicate-complaint ticket be moved over to the post that's kept.

Dupes should just have this always done, IMO. No tickbox.

DText tag for creepy comments

Some people don't want to see creepy comments.
Therefore, I hereby suggest the creation of a creepy comment DText tag:

[c]creepy comments go here[/c]

Creepy comments would be hidden, like spoilers:
this is a spoiler

But unlike spoilers, you'd have to click on creepy comments to make them visible.
There would have to be some way to distinguish creepy comments from spoilers, so a black rectangle wouldn't be enough. Maybe a black rectangle with a red outline (but what about the colorblindies???).

Posting creepy comments with the DText tag would be allowed, posting them without the DText tag would be a bannable offense.

Munkelzahn said:
DText tag for creepy comments

Some people don't want to see creepy comments.
Therefore, I hereby suggest the creation of a creepy comment DText tag:

[c]creepy comments go here[/c]

Creepy comments would be hidden, like spoilers:
this is a spoiler

But unlike spoilers, you'd have to click on creepy comments to make them visible.
There would have to be some way to distinguish creepy comments from spoilers, so a black rectangle would't enough.

Posting creepy comments with the DText tag would be allowed, posting them without the DText tag would not be.

Seems like a nice idea to me, but I'm not sure if the ones that leave creepy comments would even bother to do that...

Munkelzahn said:

[c]creepy comments go here[/c]

I have three objections to this.

1. This may encourage creepy comments.
2. I am not a cat but I think curiosity could kill me or atlesat kill my buzz. Really if this were implemented I would want anything with creepy text to be hidden outright.
3. This feature is already available via

creepy: [spoiler]would you fuck me?[/spoiler]

like so...

creepy:
Would you fuck me? ...I would fuck me.

Request/Harassment: Can't another table be added to the tag alias/association ticket system that would just contain a link to the forum-topic it created? It would be nice just to have a field to click on the tag page if we saw a suggestion pending we thought might be problematic.

Seems like a simple enough way of avoiding making folks post in the "alias/implication tracking thread". I guess there might be a more complicated solution in the works but it could be a bandaid until that's ready?

...Cells/Values before the change could just be left blank.

Genjar said:
Requested feature: Edit or delete our own tickets

Why it'd be useful: I left a comment report about something that evidently got handled while I was typing it up. I did check the ticket list before submitting the report, but I presume that it had been reported as User Complaint. (Which I can't see at my user level.) So my report is completely redundant now, and I wish I could delete it...

I can second this. Even FA has this feature.

ippiki_ookami said:
I can second this. Even FA has this feature.

I'd be ok with this as long as the ticket was permanent after being handled by an admin.

ragswift said:
Request/Harassment: Can't another table be added to the tag alias/association ticket system that would just contain a link to the forum-topic it created? It would be nice just to have a field to click on the tag page if we saw a suggestion pending we thought might be problematic.

Seems like a simple enough way of avoiding making folks post in the "alias/implication tracking thread". I guess there might be a more complicated solution in the works but it could be a bandaid until that's ready?

...Cells/Values before the change could just be left blank.

Also a good idea I think.

Suggestion: Can we have the green "'edit-posts' mode" affect changes after like 10 seconds onBlur instead of (or in addition to) having a confirm/update button? (There'd maybe be a countdown to cancel sending those changes in case the user realized they'd be sending a mistake, after which point the edit goes in.)

If it could be disabled as a feature in the user settings for folks who don't want that it would be perfect.

Anyway. This would save an action (clicking 'update') when doing tag cleanup. This seems trivial but it REALLY adds up if there's like 500 entries under some ambiguous tag that needs to be sorted through.

REQUEST: A easy way to make tickets on SETS that break the rules.

I feel like filtration of content could benefit greatly if we had some new categories for tags, and made certain categories mandatory or else image-posts don't go through.

I also considered the idea of having a requirement of 6 general tags minimum (is there already such a limit, perhaps?), but that might result in too many brand-new tags to deal with and just generally tick off users.

These categories are already fairly well established but not codified as such. With the addition of a few more tickboxes or radio-buttons on the normal uploads page for these along with sections or tooltips which load from the wiki, I think tagging could be improved dramatically in this way.

ADDENDUM: This goes along with Munkelzahn's suggestion about notifications about DNP and semi-DNP artists showing up on an upload. If anything from their post groks, then consider implementing it at the same time.

ragswift said:
I feel like filtration of content could benefit greatly if we had some new categories for tags, and made certain categories mandatory or else image-posts don't go through.

Not every image contains characters/genders/species. And it'd be really dirty to have to have a no_gender or no_species tag on every post that doesn't have one.

tony311 said:
Not every image contains characters/genders/species. And it'd be really dirty to have to have a no_gender or no_species tag on every post that doesn't have one.

I've searched on still_life and found it lacking.

I think searching for -solo -group -duo will just return a bunch of poorly tagged images. Care to explain a bit more, maybe with some examples?

This sounds like a very uncommon exception. But to avoid dirtyness, could we instead just warn users if they've left out certain categories, Tony?

I understand that messyness is undesirable, but honestly if this makes 95%+ of searches and submissions cleaner and more functional is it really still okay to make a philosophical objection like "It's dirty so I don't like it"?

tony311 said:
Not every image contains characters/genders/species. And it'd be really dirty to have to have a no_gender or no_species tag on every post that doesn't have one.

We already have 'none' for artists, beyond 'unknown_artist'. By making it a mandatory selection instead of optional secondary selections, you can have a secondary button for "there are no characters in this image" or the like, and an 'add extra selection' textbox for additional characters to be added, for example. Gender could have none, male, female, herm, other, with other popping open a textbox for a unique gender, if that was how people wanted (I'd just go without the other option) and none being auto-selected and the dropdown unselectable only when there are no character tags given (which would be a better selection to have before gender in the list procedural).

"None" isn't a tag, that is just a placeholder the page displays if the artist category is empty, to let people know that there should be something added.

123easy said:
We already have 'none' for artists, beyond 'unknown_artist'. By making it a mandatory selection instead of optional secondary selections, you can have a secondary button for "there are no characters in this image" or the like, and an 'add extra selection' textbox for additional characters to be added, for example. Gender could have none, male, female, herm, other, with other popping open a textbox for a unique gender, if that was how people wanted (I'd just go without the other option) and none being auto-selected and the dropdown unselectable only when there are no character tags given (which would be a better selection to have before gender in the list procedural).

Well, there is ALWAYS an artist. Everything else is optional

NotMeNotYou said:
"None" isn't a tag, that is just a placeholder the page displays if the artist category is empty, to let people know that there should be something added.

Oh, I know. But it existing allows usage for other required tags.

I know I posted this over a month ago, but it seemed to be passed over without a second thought. If it is a bad idea, please let me know so I wont have to wonder and bring it up again.

PROPOSAL: That a favorite also votes the image up 1.

REASON: I have noticed for years now that nearly every image has more favorites than up-votes. This just seems asinine to me. If you favorite it, then you are also essentially saying it is a good piece of art.

I just think it would be easier and make the rating system just a bit more useful. Making the search by rating a lot more consistent and useful.

_Waffles_ said:
I know I posted this over a month ago, but it seemed to be passed over without a second thought. If it is a bad idea, please let me know so I wont have to wonder and bring it up again.

PROPOSAL: That a favorite also votes the image up 1.

REASON: I have noticed for years now that nearly every image has more favorites than up-votes. This just seems asinine to me. If you favorite it, then you are also essentially saying it is a good piece of art.

I just think it would be easier and make the rating system just a bit more useful. Making the search by rating a lot more consistent and useful.

Favorites DO upvote posts. But for Priv+. We members have to do it manually

Xch3l said:
Favorites DO upvote posts. But for Priv+. We members have to do it manually

Curious: if favorites do up-vote posts, why does it not show? Do all of the images with (example) 5 up-votes and 23 favorites have so many down-votes to bring the 23+ to a 5? Also what is "Priv+"?

_Waffles_ said:
Curious: if favorites do up-vote posts, why does it not show? Do all of the images with (example) 5 up-votes and 23 favorites have so many down-votes to bring the 23+ to a 5?

Nope, there are more member level users than Pivileged (79 last I checked 5 minutes ago) and not many of them fave posts.

Also what is "Priv+"?

Privileged and above

Ok, so my best question now is: why can not all members have the same ability for a favorite to also increase up-vote count?

You said that it did, but for only 79 people. Yay..... Thanks for telling me that less than probably .01% of the people on this site can do that, therefore "Favorites DO upvote posts"...

_Waffles_ said:
I know I posted this over a month ago, but it seemed to be passed over without a second thought. If it is a bad idea, please let me know so I wont have to wonder and bring it up again.

PROPOSAL: That a favorite also votes the image up 1.

REASON: I have noticed for years now that nearly every image has more favorites than up-votes. This just seems asinine to me. If you favorite it, then you are also essentially saying it is a good piece of art.

I just think it would be easier and make the rating system just a bit more useful. Making the search by rating a lot more consistent and useful.

If we did that, it would allow people to scum upvotes by faving with numerous alt accounts, and we can't very well tell them not to fav things using multiple accounts, so they'd be able to cheat the system without penalty.

ippiki_ookami said:
If we did that, it would allow people to scum upvotes by faving with numerous alt accounts, and we can't very well tell them not to fav things using multiple accounts, so they'd be able to cheat the system without penalty.

Is that really that much of a problem?

ippiki_ookami said:
If we did that, it would allow people to scum upvotes by faving with numerous alt accounts, and we can't very well tell them not to fav things using multiple accounts, so they'd be able to cheat the system without penalty.

Then why members are allowed to vote at all if we're afraid of multi-accounts? Is voting the normal way more traceable than voting with favs?

ippiki_ookami said:
If we did that, it would allow people to scum upvotes by faving with numerous alt accounts, and we can't very well tell them not to fav things using multiple accounts, so they'd be able to cheat the system without penalty.

So there is something stopping people from voting up a piece with multiple accounts, but not something that stops them from favoriting multiple accounts? I am pretty sure that the 3-5 to 1 favorite to up-vote ratio is not because everyone up-voting is favoriting the image 3-5 times using different accounts....

Gilda_The_Gryphon said:
Then why members are allowed to vote at all if we're afraid of multi-accounts? Is voting the normal way more traceable than voting with favs?

It's against the rules to use multiple accounts to cheat the vote system, and people have been banned for it in the past (and warned very recently). Regarding priv+ people using the fav function to cheat the votes, well, that's not something we're presently capable of investigating through any reasonable means (doesn't mean we can't at all though.)

_Waffles_ said:
So there is something stopping people from voting up a piece with multiple accounts, but not something that stops them from favoriting multiple accounts? I am pretty sure that the 3-5 to 1 favorite to up-vote ratio is not because everyone up-voting is favoriting the image 3-5 times using different accounts....

No, since so few people have priv+ when considering the size of our userbase, it's not really an issue. And as I said, it wouldn't be very reasonable of us to make a rule against priv+ users faving with multiple accounts just to prevent a few extra votes here and there. If it's happening, it's probably so rare it's trivial.

Sortof part of another conversation but https://e621.net/forum/show/91368

Basically: search a single tag -- wiki page for it shows by default rather than related tags (if a wiki-page exists). Or potentially just display the wiki-entry on all searches just for the first tag in the query. It might improve tagging-awareness.

ippiki_ookami said:
It's against the rules to use multiple accounts to cheat the vote system, and people have been banned for it in the past (and warned very recently). Regarding priv+ people using the fav function to cheat the votes, well, that's not something we're presently capable of investigating through any reasonable means (doesn't mean we can't at all though.)
No, since so few people have priv+ when considering the size of our userbase, it's not really an issue. And as I said, it wouldn't be very reasonable of us to make a rule against priv+ users faving with multiple accounts just to prevent a few extra votes here and there. If it's happening, it's probably so rare it's trivial.

So if it is so rare, then what about the initial concept of my proposal: that favoring a post (for all members) also increases the up-vote by one?

_Waffles_ said:
So if it is so rare, then what about the initial concept of my proposal: that favoring a post (for all members) also increases the up-vote by one?

I think the intent is to view it as an enticement/reward to strive for by earning the elevated status.

edidaf said:
I think the intent is to view it as an enticement/reward to strive for by earning the elevated status.

This

edidaf said:
I think the intent is to view it as an enticement/reward to strive for by earning the elevated status.

So an incentive for someone to become one of only currently 79 (out of thousands of members) is that you can click one less time?

Instead of letting all members do this and having the upvote system work much more accurately?

_Waffles_ said:
So an incentive for someone to become one of only currently 79 (out of thousands of members) is that you can click one less time?

Instead of letting all members do this and having the upvote system work much more accurately?

Priv+ get the fav upvote plus the manual upvote.

edidaf said:
Priv+ get the fav upvote plus the manual upvote.

I understand, but why do you think having something in the site that makes (personal opinion) the site work less efficiently should be an incentive?

_Waffles_ said:
I understand, but why do you think having something in the site that makes (personal opinion) the site work less efficiently should be an incentive?

How is it less efficient? It's just upvotes

TheHuskyK9 said:
How is it less efficient? It's just upvotes

Since it a trackable system that you can search for, it sure does seem pretty stupid to look for a popular image that was favorited 80 times, but only has an up-vote of 10.

Since "sort by rating" searches work by sorting via up and down votes, it is something that affects the search ability of the site. The site works VERY hard to make sure images are tagged correctly for searchability, why not change this to help with the same cause?

Requested feature: Quoting users in the comment field like this:

@titaniachkt:

Notifies them in some way (Shows up on their Blip section, or maybe a PM)

Why it would be useful: So you can know when someone is communicating with you without having to stalk the comments of every post ever

titaniachkt said:
Requested feature: Quoting users in the comment field like this:

@titaniachkt:

Notifies them in some way (Shows up on their Blip section, or maybe a PM)

Why it would be useful: So you can know when someone is communicating with you without having to stalk the comments of every post ever

You know you have the 'My account' page where 'Search for myself in comments' is, right? (you can bookmark that link too)

I don't know if this has been requested before, but somehow I don't feel like browsing through 24 forum pages, so...

Requested feature: new post metatag: source:

Why it would be useful: When using the source field on the upload page to provide a link to the downloadable image, setting a proper source could be done quicker than having to edit the post right after uploading.

Xch3l said:
You know you have the 'My account' page where 'Search for myself in comments' is, right? (you can bookmark that link too)

Doesn't resolve having to actively check, instead of a 'you have mail!' notice, which is exceedingly helpful for infrequent contacts.

123easy said:
Doesn't resolve having to actively check, instead of a 'you have mail!' notice, which is exceedingly helpful for infrequent contacts.

DAT BIG GREEN BOX ERMAHGERD

EsalRider said:
I don't know if this has been requested before, but somehow I don't feel like browsing through 24 forum pages, so...

Requested feature: new post metatag: source:

Why it would be useful: When using the source field on the upload page to provide a link to the downloadable image, setting a proper source could be done quicker than having to edit the post right after uploading.

Wut.

Also, source: is already used, see https://e621.net/help/cheatsheet#Searching_Post_Metatags

Butterscotch said:
Wut.

Also, source: is already used, see https://e621.net/help/cheatsheet#Searching_Post_Metatags

I know source is used for search queries. Extending its functionality to set the source when tagging would be what I'm saying.

Can we get a function to search for images with more or less than a specific number of tags, I think itd help older images with only a few to get some more or a quick search to challenge yourself on a really well tagged picture to find something

Sollux said:
Can we get a function to search for images with more or less than a specific number of tags, I think itd help older images with only a few to get some more or a quick search to challenge yourself on a really well tagged picture to find something

Yes, for example: tagcount:<5
Or, tagcount:>70

How about a download button that actually downloads the image instead of opening a full red version in a new tab, my mobile phone would make great use of that as would some others I'd wager

Sollux said:
How about a download button that actually downloads the image instead of opening a full red version in a new tab, my mobile phone would make great use of that as would some others I'd wager

...How about you just download it on a computer and transfer it over to your phone afterwards? >_> I mean, if you don't have rightclick save functionality... deal with it? >_>;

123easy said:
...How about you just download it on a computer and transfer it over to your phone afterwards? >_> I mean, if you don't have rightclick save functionality... deal with it? >_>;

You do know some people actually browse the site from a phone right? (Myself included, I might even browse it more on a phone than pc lately), personally I think it's a good idea.

Butterscotch said:
You do know some people actually browse the site from a phone right? (Myself included, I might even browse it more on a phone than pc lately), also, I think it's a good idea.

And I'm tired of the mobile invasion to desktop sites? For one, tap and hold functionality should have the same effect as right-click, unless you have a phone whose OS is from 2002 or older. If you don't want to update your phone, as I said, deal with it. For two, mobile e6 is over there -> https://e621.net/post/m If the request was for the mobile-specific site without using the context menu, then by all means- but it wasn't, so it gets anti-mobile sentiment.

123easy said:
...How about you just download it on a computer and transfer it over to your phone afterwards? >_> I mean, if you don't have rightclick save functionality... deal with it? >_>;

I was under the assumption features were for peoples convenience

123easy said:
And I'm tired of the mobile invasion to desktop sites? For one, tap and hold functionality should have the same effect as right-click, unless you have a phone whose OS is from 2002 or older.

my phone is fine but the service here is terrible, I have to refresh pages multiple times sometimes to get a picture to fully load to save it so a button allowing background downloads would save time and hassle, remember I'm not demanding this and its up to the admins to decide whether or not its worth implementation

Sollux said:
my phone is fine but the service here is terrible, I have to refresh pages multiple times sometimes to get a picture to fully load to save it so a button allowing background downloads would save time and hassle, remember I'm not demanding this and its up to the admins to decide whether or not its worth implementation

Wow, I think I agree with 123aesy then, you probably should update your phone or something, i.e. in my case browsing the site from a phone it's pretty much the same than doing it from a pc (everything works exactly the same, images load quickly, pages, etc...)

Sollux said:
How about a download button that actually downloads the image instead of opening a full red version in a new tab, my mobile phone would make great use of that as would some others I'd wager

What kind of phone do you have? In Chrome on my Android phone I can just long-press the download button, and that gives me an option to "Save Link As", which will save the image for you. Any phone that supports right-clicking (by long-pressing) combined with any browser that allows you to save pages/files will work with e621's current Download button.

Char said:
What kind of phone do you have? In Chrome on my Android phone I can just long-press the download button, and that gives me an option to "Save Link As", which will save the image for you. Any phone that supports right-clicking (by long-pressing) combined with any browser that allows you to save pages/files will work with e621's current Download button.

oh really let me try that really fast... Nope, it lets me open in new tab, copy or share the link. I'm using a Nokia Lumia 520. Internet explorer is the only browser it has I think

Sollux said:
oh really let me try that really fast... Nope, it lets me open in new tab, copy or share the link. I'm using a Nokia Lumia 520. Internet explorer is the only browser it has I think

http://answers.microsoft.com/en-us/winphone/forum/wp8-wpcamera/how-do-i-save-photos-from-the-internet-onto-my/975332ff-2c56-4691-9d3f-fc3f8ca6e66e Tried this? You'd click the Download link first so your phone displays the original, full-size image (if that option isn't already enabled in your e621 account) and then just save the pic as described in that link.

After so much Off-Topic:

1st Requested Feature: Timestamps everywhere for all mod-actions on the submission itself or tag-history or something, eg. When was it deleted, when was what flag created/removed/approved. Maybe only visible to admins, maybe visible to all.

Why it would be useful: Makes it easier to trace everything without having to search the dozens of mod actions.
(or make a quick link to a already filtered mod_actions page, that may work as well)

2nd Requested Feature: More transparency on destroyed posts, there should be a minimum amount of information still be kept after destruction, even if these are only available to mod and above, or at the very least a reason for the destruction somewhere.
Information to be kept should be tags, uploader, maybe md5 to prevent a re-upload.

Why it would be useful: Makes tracking easier if somebody destroys something and isn't saying anything about it.

Third requested feature: Encourage artists on the settings page to contact us so that we may link their account and artist tag together, the sentence currently isn't exactly descriptive in what to do to unlock this feature.

Why it would be useful: Better utilization of the feature may result in happier artists and thus more porn.
And that is all that counts, right?

Requested feature: How about an avatar history?

Why it would be useful: It's there so you don't have to go searching for them in case you want to favorite them or reuse them as an avatar.

JoeX said:
Requested feature: How about an avatar history?

Why it would be useful: It's there so you don't have to go searching for them in case you want to favorite them or reuse them as an avatar.

Sounds like you could accomplish this with sets right now. Just make a private "set" for your avatars.

Don't know if anyone suggested this but can we have animated avatars? Like the GIFs and loops on FA.

TheHuskyK9 said:
Don't know if anyone suggested this but can we have animated avatars? Like the GIFs and loops on FA.

Could get too distracting.

furballs_dc said:
Could get too distracting.

Also too much resources. There's a reason we don't have flash thumbnails; This would be along the same scenario.

Requested feature:
Option to sort tags on post by count instead of alphabetical order.

Why it can be useful:
It can help quickly find misspelled tags. Or to find least favorite pokemon by looking on post #329124

Requested feature:
Allow underscores to show up in user's posts. AKA USER1 to USER1_ ect

Why it can be useful:
It can stop people impersonating other users all over the site.

Requested Feature: monthly art contests following specific guidelines ( like only traditional media, or a speed drawing with a specific character and a small submission window) voted in by users and mods.

why it would be useful: it would encourage artists to post more of what viewers want and give fresh artists a good chance for critique. Also it promotes a community.
Edit: looking at this now I realize that this isn't a feature lol. Disregard this post.

Requested Feature: HTML5 Capabilities

Why it would be useful: I don't know if this has been asked before, or if this is even possible, but adding HTML5 support to Flash posts. It would allow tons of phones, non-Flash PC's, and other platforms, like PS3/4 and Xbox 360/One to view the beautiful creations of moving porn that people make that are not GIFs. And if not, well, poop.

Striker_J said:
Requested Feature: HTML5 Capabilities

Why it would be useful: I don't know if this has been asked before, or if this is even possible, but adding HTML5 support to Flash posts. It would allow tons of phones, non-Flash PC's, and other platforms, like PS3/4 and Xbox 360/One to view the beautiful creations of moving porn that people make that are not GIFs. And if not, well, poop.

You can't just convert a flash to HTML5 (at least not yet).

Requested feature: A "times searched" count on tags' pages.

A count on the tag's wiki page that shows how many times someone has searched with it.
This would provide excellent insight as to how useful a tag is/isn't for discussions of whether a tag is worth keeping or not.

Halite said:
Requested feature: A "times searched" count on tags' pages.

A count on the tag's wiki page that shows how many times someone has searched with it.
This would provide excellent insight as to how useful a tag is/isn't for discussions of whether a tag is worth keeping or not.

seconded, that sounds like a good idea

Requested feature:
When user search for tag (s)he sometimes get box that states: "Maybe you meant: ...". How about box that states "This artist is DNP!" when you search for DNP artist or his/her alias?

Gilda_The_Gryphon said:
Requested feature:
When user search for tag (s)he sometimes get box that states: "Maybe you meant: ...". How about box that states "This artist is DNP!" when you search for DNP artist or his/her alias?

we already effectively get this with the avoidposting tag; Would this really be necessary? Esp. since some artists are only partial DNP, so perusing their legit stuff would be annoying with a redbox.

Honestly, I dunno why the DNP list doesn't just straight up prevent uploading combined with a partial DNP setting that allows uploading under scrutiny for partial DNPers.