We need a feature "Posts since last visit"

Moe_Biehl said:
What if artist pages had a field for explicitly indicating whether they have granted permission for their artwork to be posted here?

My only reason for suggesting this is so that artists wouldn't have to answer multiple "Can I post your stuff on e621.net?" questions. It definitely would not prevent them from changing their minds at a future date and asking to be put on the DNP list.

I'm thinking of a plaintext field for including the artist's statement.

I like this idea. And maybe have a field/prompt/policy for the date of that artist's statement as well? Because knowing when they said it is almost as important as knowing what they said about it. Maybe someone asked three years ago, and someone updates to add that statement in a year later. If there's no date, it'd be pretty useless to be unable to tell if that was true three years ago or three weeks ago that they felt such-and-such a way about it. Showing just the date the info was added would be midly useful. And would having a place to stick the source for the info be overkill? Because it'd certainly make it easier to double check what was said and when they said it.

These are just ideas, no more than that. I like the concept though and think something in this vein would be useful when e621 is maintained by so many different people. As a way to pool the information into one easy place to reference. Also a place to explain the exact exceptions an artist may have for 'conditional DNP' and 'avoid posting' type situations concerning their art, specific commissions/comics/etc they don't want uploaded, etc. Recently there was a whole set of pictures that someone uploaded, only to discover there was an off-the-record request made by the artist ages ago for that specific set to not be uploaded here. It even predated Char, and apparently only some admins knew about it. Having a place to put info like that might save future headaches from recurring.

@Moe_Biehl @furrypickle
I think those details can be added in their artist wiki (when an artist tag is created a wiki entry is also created), in the same field as the artist description.

@Moe Biehl:
Am currently trialling this 'tag repulsion' idea locally in my own TMSU-based tagging system.
I'm beginning to think it fits better as part of the following concept:

Tag Groups

Tag Groups collect ontologically-related tags, for example

• 'sex' [male female herm dickgirl intersex ...]
• 'resolution' [absurd_res hi_res low_res]
• 'aspect ratio' [16:9 16:10 widescreen]
• 'clothing' [omg so many tags]
• 'tops' [slightly less tags]
• 'bottoms' [ many tags ]
• 'pose' [hand_on_hip hand_on_head leg_up etc..]

Being able to have wiki articles about the groups with automatically generated lists of members would be an important part of this.

There are a few functions that can be improved with the use of tag groups, mostly relating to helping the user to pick correct tags:

• 'What's that one clothing/hair/pose tag that refers to...' -> look up wiki article on the group, it clarifies the difference between member tags and shows you all tags in that group. This is better than 'see also' which has to be manually maintained and consequently can become incomplete or asymmetrical for some or all of the relevant tags
• Radiobutton groups (similarly to what you suggest Moe, 'only one of these tags can be applied to a post') - stopping people from applying nonsensical tag combinations.
• Quick tagging of tags that really are related, as opposed to merely being correlated (to enable eg. doing most of the clothing or species tagging in one go)

Posting a bigger version should not change the pic's position in people's favorites

Requested feature:
Suppose you've favorited 3 posts:
A B C
(A = newest favorite, C = oldest favorite)

Now someone posts a bigger version of B.
Let's call the bigger version B'.
He makes B' the parent post of B, flags B for deletion, and eventually B gets deleted => its favorites are transferred to B'.

Now your favorites will look like this:
B' A C

I think they should look like this:
A B' C

Why it would be useful:
People get confused when the order of their favorites changes suddenly and without warning.

Requested feature: Customized Tags

Why it would be useful: Customized Tagging would help users of e621 find what they are looking for, easier. The feature would be sort of like a blacklist accept instead of hiding certain pictures it would show them. For example, if I had the tag "boobs" tagged under customized tag then any pictures on e621 with the tag "boobs" would show. Now I personally do not know if the e621 already has the customized tag option available yet.
[/quote]

post #1234 should be clickable everywhere

Requested feature:
The text post #1234 should produce a clickable link everywhere on e621.
Currently, post #1234 is not clickable in these parts of the site:
- Mod Queue

Why it would be useful:
If people flag a smaller version but don't parent the bigger one, I could get to the bigger one from the Mod Queue with a single click. Which is useful for checking if the post linked in the flag reason is really a bigger version of the flagged post.

badteacher4 said:
Requested feature: Customized Tags

Why it would be useful: Customized Tagging would help users of e621 find what they are looking for, easier. The feature would be sort of like a blacklist accept instead of hiding certain pictures it would show them. For example, if I had the tag "boobs" tagged under customized tag then any pictures on e621 with the tag "boobs" would show. Now I personally do not know if the e621 already has the customized tag option available yet.

It sounds like what you're talking about is the opposite of a blacklist, aka a whitelist. You can make your blacklist function as a whitelist by using the "-" operator before a tag to tell the blacklist that it should show only posts that DO contain that particular tag, rather than hiding them. You can get more instruction for how to do that on the blacklist help page.

Requested feature:
Customized mascots for users, can be changed for a specific user of e621.
Why it would be useful:
Will improve experience for e621 users on the homepage.
[/quote]

badteacher4 said:

Requested feature:
Customized mascots for users, can be changed for a specific user of e621.
Why it would be useful:
Will improve experience for e621 users on the homepage.

You can already change through the mascots and it will remember the mascot that you selected. Are you talking about being able to put ANY post on the homepage?

Char said:
You can already change through the mascots and it will remember the mascot that you selected. Are you talking about being able to put ANY post on the homepage?

Yes, I know the feature where the users can change the mascots but I mean a customized mascot not the default mascots that are already there.

Change the admin tag under admin names to a bright color (just popped into my head), like red yellow, green, xct.

Is there a feature that disables blacklisted images from appearing in the popular section entirely, blacklisted icon and all?

I have only 2 blacklisted items and sadly sometimes the popular section is still ~50% blacklisted.

Requested feature: Have the ability to downvote/upvote answers we receive in the forums, like we do for comments.

Why it would be useful: We can see what other people think about the answer and it would make that person feel good that he/she helped a fellow member

Arcaninetales said:
Requested feature: Have the ability to downvote/upvote answers we receive in the forums, like we do for comments.

Why it would be useful: We can see what other people think about the answer and it would make that person feel good that he/she helped a fellow member

as people said in your forum, it'll turn the forums into a vote contest. hell I for one think the comments shouldn't even have a vote system. but rather a "personal" hide comment button. so clicking it only hides it for you and you alone, unless its an admin in which case it hides it for everyone like a -limit vote will do now.

your sorta new so i'll mention something. people (petty, trollish, people who have lost an argument, ect) create alts to downvote comments. voteing + Forums = recipe for dramu.

Esme_Belles said:
as people said in your forum, it'll turn the forums into a vote contest. hell I for one think the comments shouldn't even have a vote system. but rather a "personal" hide comment button. so clicking it only hides it for you and you alone, unless its an admin in which case it hides it for everyone like a -limit vote will do now.

your sorta new so i'll mention something. people (petty, trollish, people who have lost an argument, ect) create alts to downvote comments. voteing + Forums = recipe for dramu.

Iirc people never said that in his forum. But the idea of having a score system in the forums has been dropped several times...

Requested feature: Blacklists handled site side rather than via cookies

Why it would be useful: so I don't have to add tags to my blacklist more than once.

Assuming tags aren't just magically disappearing from it instead.

I'd like a button that blacks specific images, I mean it's a lot of hassle to see one image that you think is kinda "Ew", And have to go through the trouble of blacklisting it in your settings

NyanNeko said:
I'd like a button that blacks specific images, I mean it's a lot of hassle to see one image that you think is kinda "Ew", And have to go through the trouble of blacklisting it in your settings

eSix Extend adds a "Blacklist post" link to the left sidebar under "Options":
forum #66904

Requested feature:
Add user links to DText.

When you're editing text, you would enter this into a textbox:

user #14377

And e621 would display this when you've finished editing:
Munkelzahn

If I changed my username to PrincessPumbaa, e621 would change the way the DText is displayed to:
PrincessPumbaa

Why it would be useful:
When you quote someone, e621 copies their username, but there's no link to their userpage. And even if there were, the username in the quote would not change.

With DText user links, you could find all posts that quote a specific user, even if they've changed their username.

Munkelzahn said:
Requested feature:
Add user links to DText.

When you're editing text, you would enter this into a textbox:

user #14377

And e621 would display this when you've finished editing:
Munkelzahn

If I changed my username to PrincessPumbaa, e621 would change the way the DText is displayed to:
PrincessPumbaa

Why it would be useful:
When you quote someone, e621 copies their username, but there's no link to their userpage. And even if there were, the username in the quote would not change.

With DText user links, you could find all posts that quote a specific user, even if they've changed their username.

I really like this idea. Sometimes you want to be able to look up the user that was quoted, even if they've hidden their original post so they're no longer simply a few posts up from the one you're reading.

Munkelzahn said:
Requested feature:
Add user links to DText.

When you're editing text, you would enter this into a textbox:

user #14377

And e621 would display this when you've finished editing:
Munkelzahn

If I changed my username to PrincessPumbaa, e621 would change the way the DText is displayed to:
PrincessPumbaa

Why it would be useful:
When you quote someone, e621 copies their username, but there's no link to their userpage. And even if there were, the username in the quote would not change.

With DText user links, you could find all posts that quote a specific user, even if they've changed their username.

Not a bad idea. I like it.

Expand https://e621.net/static/contact with something like:

I have a problem with my account: email [email protected]

I think this may be a function that would prove itself immensely, extremely useful to end tag wars.

Tag locking

Give the admins and mods the ability to lock certain tags.
Lets say that a user is removing dickgirl and adding herm to an image of a dickgirl over and over again.

The admin/mod can then add herm to a secret list only seen by them when they are viewing the post, so that the tag can not be added again. They can also add dickgirl to the list so that the tag cannot be removed.

-herm [Can't be added]
+dickgirl [Can't be removed]

After seeing so much tag abuse and warring, I really do think that we need this function.

Don't they already have tag locking?

furballs_dc said:
Don't they already have tag locking?

Only ratings lock, I believe.

Peekaboo said:
Only ratings lock, I believe.

Ah, ok.

That reminds me:

Requested Feature: Separate text entry boxes for adding and removing tags

Rationale: To speed up adding and removing tags, and reduce nonsense tags produced by incorrect deletion/insertion (eg 'canine cutoffs gay' -> deletion of ' cutoffs ' -> new nonsense 'caninegay' tag).

Examples of actual nonsense tags produced in this way include ropebreasts, rection, sonic_(series)presenting, sonic_(series)unichrome, sonic_(series)spreading

savageorange said:
That reminds me:

Requested Feature: Separate text entry boxes for adding and removing tags

Rationale: To speed up adding and removing tags, and reduce nonsense tags produced by incorrect deletion/insertion (eg 'canine cutoffs gay' -> deletion of ' cutoffs ' -> new nonsense 'caninegay' tag).

Examples of actual nonsense tags produced in this way include ropebreasts, rection, sonic_(series)presenting, sonic_(series)unichrome, sonic_(series)spreading

You can't prevent human error. Those things will happen no matter how many different types of text boxes you have, if a space can get deleted or it's possible to click wrong, these things will always be possible.

People can make the same kind of mistake in the new textbox as the old one. They'll be adding tags and then go "whoops, not that one" and take one back...or removing an old tag from the other box and select-delete the space as well. It won't really prevent that.

But it would overcomplicate tagging. Right now, if you run into ropebreasts, you just have to hit "edit", then click where the words should be separate, then hit the spacebar, and then click save. Done. But with two separate input/output boxes, you'd have to use one box to remove ropebreasts and then move your cursor to the second box and type in rope and breasts, and then hit save. That's a lot more complicated and slower just to do a very simple tag fix. Add to that the fact it'd be easy to get it confused which box is which, and try adding tags to the "remove tags only" box. Only to have to redo all that work when it's unable to save the new tags that were put in the wrong box.

Also, the way it is now, it's very smooth between removing/correcting tags, and moving on to adding any other tags you also noticed were missing. For instance, if you click and erase tagme you don't have to do anything else before you can start adding canine mouth_open penis etc. Your cursor is already in the right place and ready to go. If there were two boxes, you'd have to move to the other box and treat it like a separate step. Doing any kind of major tag fixes would be slow and a lot more to keep track of. Right now, you can proofread the (single) tag list before hitting save to make sure it looks right. With two lists you'd have to save it before you could easily see what the final list would be. That would mean more going back and forth.

The good thing is: that type of error is not any more common than normal typos (I corrected cum_iside just today) or misspellings (I caught ior which was a very creative misspell of the character eeyore also today. And have regularly caught misspells of words like "ambiguous" or "embarrassed".) Or just getting the wrong form of the tag, like lip_bite vs biting_lip gets me all the time, and sometimes I'm not the only one who made that mistake so I correct both of them. It happens. And I really I don't think this suggestion would work.

furrypickle said:
You can't prevent human error. Those things will happen no matter how many different types of text boxes you have, if a space can get deleted or it's possible to click wrong, these things will always be possible.

People can make the same kind of mistake in the new textbox as the old one. They'll be adding tags and then go "whoops, not that one" and take one back...or removing an old tag from the other box and select-delete the space as well. It won't really prevent that.

But it would overcomplicate tagging. Right now, if you run into ropebreasts, you just have to hit "edit", then click where the words should be separate, then hit the spacebar, and then click save. Done. But with two separate input/output boxes, you'd have to use one box to remove ropebreasts and then move your cursor to the second box and type in rope and breasts, and then hit save. That's a lot more complicated and slower just to do a very simple tag fix. Add to that the fact it'd be easy to get it confused which box is which, and try adding tags to the "remove tags only" box. Only to have to redo all that work when it's unable to save the new tags that were put in the wrong box.

Also, the way it is now, it's very smooth between removing/correcting tags, and moving on to adding any other tags you also noticed were missing. For instance, if you click and erase tagme you don't have to do anything else before you can start adding canine mouth_open penis etc. Your cursor is already in the right place and ready to go. If there were two boxes, you'd have to move to the other box and treat it like a separate step. Doing any kind of major tag fixes would be slow and a lot more to keep track of. Right now, you can proofread the (single) tag list before hitting save to make sure it looks right. With two lists you'd have to save it before you could easily see what the final list would be. That would mean more going back and forth.

The good thing is: that type of error is not any more common than normal typos (I corrected cum_iside just today) or misspellings (I caught ior which was a very creative misspell of the character eeyore also today. And have regularly caught misspells of words like "ambiguous" or "embarrassed".) Or just getting the wrong form of the tag, like lip_bite vs biting_lip gets me all the time, and sometimes I'm not the only one who made that mistake so I correct both of them. It happens. And I really I don't think this suggestion would work.

Some of your points are accurate. I don't think you realize what the suggestion actually is though. I'm not suggesting to replace that box. I'm suggesting to keep it and add two smaller ones. So cases where you are adding one or two tags over many posts, or removing one or two tags over many posts, could be done much easier (paste, delete any that don't apply, without any danger of pasting in the middle of a word for example.)

WebM support for better quality lower filesize animations with actual thumbnails, like here: https://danbooru.donmai.us/posts?tags=webm

Peekaboo said:
I think this may be a function that would prove itself immensely, extremely useful to end tag wars.

Tag locking

Give the admins and mods the ability to lock certain tags.
Lets say that a user is removing dickgirl and adding herm to an image of a dickgirl over and over again.

The admin/mod can then add herm to a secret list only seen by them when they are viewing the post, so that the tag can not be added again. They can also add dickgirl to the list so that the tag cannot be removed.

-herm [Can't be added]
+dickgirl [Can't be removed]

After seeing so much tag abuse and warring, I really do think that we need this function.

I've already requested this a thousand times. From what I understand it should finally be making its way onto the site in the not-too-distant future.

Mario69 said:
WebM support for better quality lower filesize animations with actual thumbnails, like here: https://danbooru.donmai.us/posts?tags=webm

Have also requested this several times over the past few months. Don't know if there's currently a plan to get it done anytime soon, but the devs are aware.

Char said:
I've already requested this a thousand times. From what I understand it should finally be making its way onto the site in the not-too-distant future.

Aw fuck yeah! Tag wars bye-bye!

A reverse image search link through http://iqdb.harry.lu/.

Why? Makes finding duplicates trivial and possible with a single click.

Requested feature: Being able to choose different file-naming options for posts, instead of just the md5 hash

Why it would be useful: Adds further versatility to searching, and helps locating an image on the site if some information is missing at a glance, without having to do a reverse search

Some options:

• Appending the artist tag(s) to a post's filename, in addition to the hash
• Using tags as the filename (similar to the way yande.re handles file-naming)

Requested feature: Applying blacklists to the Pool index

Why it would be useful: Because ew

titanmelon said:
Requested feature: Applying blacklists to pools

Why it would be useful: Because ew

They actually work there. I've seen pools with blacklitsted thumbnails...

Or you mean blacklisting pools entirely?

Requested Feature: Instead of forums getting locked, why don't they just get deleted (by admins, not janitors)?
Why It Would Be Useful: Frees up space a little.

Arcaninetales said:
Requested Feature: Instead of forums getting locked, why don't they just get deleted (by admins, not janitors)?
Why It Would Be Useful: Frees up space a little.

They can be hidden.

Arcaninetales said:
Requested Feature: Instead of forums getting locked, why don't they just get deleted (by admins, not janitors)?
Why It Would Be Useful: Frees up space a little.

They can, if it's empty.

Arcaninetales said:
Requested Feature: Instead of forums getting locked, why don't they just get deleted (by admins, not janitors)?
Why It Would Be Useful: Frees up space a little.

They can be hidden.

Xch3l said:
Or you mean blacklisting pools entirely?

Yeah, I should've clarified
Edited
-

Requested Feature: Some kind of easily-accessed list of recent tags introduced/removed;
Possibly as an enhancement to the Tags section

It could include:

• Date introduced
• Tag count
• Link to wiki entry (optional)
• Brief explanation of how the tag is used (possibly interchangeable with the wiki link)

Why It Would Be Useful: To:

• Keep track of tag introduction/implementation history
• Provide an easy reference for the community to see what's changing
• Provide an easy reference for new/returning users to see what kind of content is recognized with tags, and explanations on how to use them

(not sure how to explain this, but here goes)
I always use some tag (tags) in the search box,
for example I use this tag since you cannot blacklist range syntax
score:>-1
(it prolongs your lifespan and keeps you from having nightmares) (* *)

and it is tiring to always retype tag or tags, every time you log in or want to search for something else and having this or any other tag that is always in the search box is messy and bothering somewhat,

Requested feature:
so maybe having something opposite of tag blacklist,
a tag whitelist?
main function could be the same
you add tags that you ALWAYS want them to be automatically searched
but those tags in the tag withelist are NEVER shown in the search box

so for example if you have ~pokémon rating:safe in the tag whitelist
and if you typed ~digimon in the search box
the result is that both the tag whitelist tags and search fbox tags are searched
like this: ~pokémon rating:safe ~digimon but in the search box you only see ~digimon (the tag you searched for)

Why it would be useful:
you then could add a group of tags you always want them to be searched
without bothering your self to have them retype every single time
and those tags won't be shown in the search box
that way it would be clean and clear
this would be very useful

(maybe tag whitelist is the wrong name to call this function but i hope you understood the idea)

Juicy said:
Requested feature:
so maybe having something opposite of tag blacklist,
a tag whitelist?
main function could be the same
you add tags that you ALWAYS want them to be automatically searched
but those tags in the tag withelist are NEVER shown in the search field

We may or may not end up adding such a feature in the future, but in the meantime you can kind of do that. You can add negated tags to your blacklist, and it'll essentially filter out anything that doesn't match them. In your example, your blacklist would include these two lines:

-pokémon
-rating:safe

Only problem with this solution is that it's clientside, so you'll mostly just end up with a bunch of blank result pages. (Note: make sure you use the accent in pokémon, it doesn't currently work if you use pokemon since it doesn't convert to the aliased tag)

Requested feature: Fix thumbnail button available to all users

Why it would be useful: When cases like the one here occur
post #511141
(unless we intend to keep that post as a surprise)

Sofi said:
.... Why not just disable the ability to upload any image with fewer than four tags?

Peekaboo said:

Sofi said:
.... Why not just disable the ability to upload any image with fewer than four tags?

On the one hand it would force people to add a minimum of four tags.

As a side effect, it may increase the instances of junk tags just-to-get-it-uploaded.

I don't know about you, but I'd rather find an image that's sorely in need of some tag help by searching for ones with <4 tags and add more tags, etc. Instead of finding an image with a bunch of junk tags I'll have to double check aren't in fact character names, copyright names or artists names or mistags of valid things that need to be added the proper tag for, etc. So yeah, we could force the quantity, but I think the quality of tagging would take a hit. And result in even bigger tag messes to untangle in the long run. /just my two cents

furrypickle said:
On the one hand it would force people to add a minimum of four tags.

As a side effect, it may increase the instances of junk tags just-to-get-it-uploaded.

male female straight sex
There, that was hard. That would take me about a second if I had those on my quick tags.

And if people just press random buttons to create four tags, then they might as well yell "I want to get negative records."

Peekaboo said:
male female straight sex
There, that was hard. That would take me about a second if I had those on my quick tags.

And if people just press random buttons to create four tags, then they might as well yell "I want to get negative records."

But we're not talking about the people who'd have those tags already on their mind. Anyone who'd type "male female straight sex" (for your example) would already be comfortable adding tags, understand at least a handful of tags to add, and wouldn't ever need to be prompted about adding more than the 4-tags-minimum because they'd already have them added long before they ever hit 'submit' on the upload screen. They'd never even see the error message.

The only people who'd be trying to upload something without at least four tags are the people who 1, don't understand our tag system, 2, are intimidated to learn our tag system 3, aren't willing to educate themselves so they'll just guess a couple of random tags and hit enter, (quality of tags taking a hit), or 4, don't give an f and will type anything to get past that screen (generating a tag mess).

These are not the types of people who are already primed to go with at least four tags off the top of their head. And requiring it to finish the upload won't change that without also increasing the number of bad tags from types 3 and 4. And I think types 1 and 2 will probably just guess enough tags the first time, with only a small minority going to educate themselves afterward. Probably the same small minority who'd go educate themselves after receiving a neutral record for failing to add 4 tags minimum. So overall it might not actually change much. But it would eliminate tagcount:<4 searchability (which is a nice way to locate new undertagged posts) and it would increase tag vandalism/bad tagging instances.

Tagging is not hard once you're used to it, that's true. But until you've learned the basics, it is very intimidating. Or at least that is a very common response from people before they've learned enough basic tags to get by. I can add a hundred tags off the top of my head, but there was a time I would have been nervous adding any (because I was unsure of the exact terms for the tags and which tags existed). If someone is used to tagging on a completely different site, they can know it needs tagging but quickly get stuck wondering whether we tag it:

male/female
female/male
m/f
f/m
straight
straight pairing
straight-pairing
straight_pairing
straightpairing
straight-couple
straight_sex
het
hetero
heterosexual
etc etc. Only four of those are aliased and will correct themselves. Meanwhile veteran taggers don't have to think about it, they just type straight in less than a second.

There is a lot of learning involved with tagging. People who are interested will take the time to educate themselves. People who aren't interested will guess and make up stuff until a record hits them in the face. But that's true whether the system stays the way it is now(giving them a record for uploading without four tags). Or if they end up guessing a bunch of wrong tags. Or making up tags in order to get past an upload screen. The result is always the same: they get a record. After their first record, they either start to educate themselves or start working towards a ban for themselves.

I have to agree it would be therapeutic to force them to add at least four tags. But beyond therapeutic value, I don't think the additional rates of bad tags would be much of a victory.

furrypickle said:
The only people who'd be trying to upload something without at least four tags are the people who 1, don't understand our tag system, 2, are intimidated to learn our tag system 3, aren't willing to educate themselves so they'll just guess a couple of random tags and hit enter, (quality of tags taking a hit), or 4, don't give an f and will type anything to get past that screen (generating a tag mess).

These are not the types of people who are already primed to go with at least four tags off the top of their head. And requiring it to finish the upload won't change that without also increasing the number of bad tags from types 3 and 4. And I think types 1 and 2 will probably just guess enough tags the first time, with only a small minority going to educate themselves afterward. Probably the same small minority who'd go educate themselves after receiving a neutral record for failing to add 4 tags minimum. So overall it might not actually change much. But it would eliminate tagcount:<4 searchability (which is a nice way to locate new undertagged posts) and it would increase tag vandalism/bad tagging instances.

The answer is just to educate, warn and ban people who don't go by the site rules.

Peekaboo said:
The answer is just to educate, warn and ban people who don't go by the site rules.

Yup. Agreed.

Arcaninetales said:
Requested feature: Be able to edit comments.

Why it would be useful: Mistakes happen. It's much quicker to edit the comment than to hide it and start typing it all over again.

The potential for abuse if that function gets added outweigh the benefits a hundred to one, imo.

Requested feature: New forum category. "Forum Games!" "Spammy threads!" "Site extensions, utilities and/or tools" (temporary name).

Why it would be useful: It will make categorizing these utilities a lot easier, instead of being sunken in the list of threads in the general category. And also helping new and old users alike to see what has done the community for the community.

The following list of threads could be in the new category, as of now and as far as I could find (first 20 pages in the General category). I know there may be more, but some are outdated or will not work anymore (not listed).

Xch3l said:
Requested feature: New forum category. "Forum Games!" "Spammy threads!" "Site extensions, utilities and/or tools" (temporary name).

Done :)

tony311 said:
Done :)

Whoooo!

Found while I was scanning comments for improper taggin' n' braggin'

Wyvrn said:
Some tags that the e621 community has decides are too vague or pointless have been aliased to invalid_tag. Meaning if you try to add one of those tags, it becomes invalid_tag instead.

It's not a very user friendly system, because it doesn't give you any warning the tag is invalid before you try to add it. Also, if you tried to add multiple tags at the same time and see invalid_tag show up, it can be really had to tell which tag it was that caused the problem.

Here's the list of tags aliased to invalid_tag currently.

An alert sounds like it would actually do some good for the tagging system.

Peekaboo said:
I think this may be a function that would prove itself immensely, extremely useful to end tag wars.

After seeing so much tag abuse and warring, I really do think that we need this function.

I had that idea in the past, I ended up discarding it and never brought it up because of this;
if a rule changes thenthose tags cannot be changed unless an admin goes though every image with locked tags and changes them.
Scary, yes?

Requested feature: on your favorites page an edit mode. Ive noticed that I can't really delete my favorites anymore individually it just gives me an error you've already favorited this post vs what it used to be with remove favorite, but my request is while on your favorites page an edit button with an x on the picture which allows it to remove it from your favorites.

Why it would be useful: For one it allows us to clean up our favorites for different reasons, don't find it good anymore, favorited to look at later, favorited and then realized when looking at the picture that the gender isn't what you thought it was at first, ect. There's different reasons but it would make it easier than going in individually.

lunafox90 said:
Requested feature: on your favorites page an edit mode. Ive noticed that I can't really delete my favorites anymore individually it just gives me an error you've already favorited this post vs what it used to be with remove favorite, but my request is while on your favorites page an edit button with an x on the picture which allows it to remove it from your favorites.

Why it would be useful: For one it allows us to clean up our favorites for different reasons, don't find it good anymore, favorited to look at later, favorited and then realized when looking at the picture that the gender isn't what you thought it was at first, ect. There's different reasons but it would make it easier than going in individually.

There's a Mode dropdown below the search box where you have that option

Requested Feature: I think people forget we have a sfw side like e926.net. I was thinking it'd be useful if it were linked to on the front page somewhere right next to the the big "e621" in the center, there could be a little link that says 'or see our Safe For Work Sister Site: E926' or something similar to that. I know I tend to forget it's there. But more than that, I suspect there's some people who'd use it if they knew, but they don't realise we even have it as an option.

Why It Would Be Useful: If 926.net were linked to on the front page [https://e621.net/], then it'd be easy for people to switch between them as needed. And visa versa. Been browsing sfw for awhile and want to see something adult? Go to the front page and use the link to the adult sister site. Want to see some safe furry art and can't afford to have boobies flashing by? Go to the front page and switch to the sfw sister site. And that would make it easier for someone to bookmark the front page and have easy access to both. It's just a thought, but I think it could be widely useful.

Requested feature: A way to check for duplicate posts before uploading

Why it would be useful: Makes finding/uploading duplicates easier

titanmelon said:
Requested feature: A way to check for duplicate posts before uploading

Why it would be useful: Makes finding/uploading duplicates easier

Not official, but you can use http://iqdb.harry.lu/ for that.

Wait, don't know how I missed this. Did you guys remove the thumbnails for deleted images? I actually liked that feature. ;_;

Peekaboo said:
Wait, don't know how I missed this. Did you guys remove the thumbnails for deleted images? I actually liked that feature. ;_;

Thumbs (the originals, that is) for deleted images should never have been shown; if they did it was a bug and was fixed.

Requested feature: Have the blips link up top italicize when someone comments in the blips, just like the forum link does.

Why it would be useful: You'll know when someone has commented quicker. Plus, you won't have to keep checking the blips over and over again to see if anyone commented or not.

Requested feature: Create a list of users that are currently using a picture as their avatar (just like the 'favorited by' section)

Why it would be useful: It would be a way to avoid avatar duplicates and an easy way to find a user name if you only remember the avatar. See related thread in forum #134630.

blackest_vulture said:
Requested feature: Create a list of users that are currently using a picture as their avatar (just like the 'favorited by' section)

Why it would be useful: It would be a way to avoid avatar duplicates and an easy way to find a user name if you only remember the avatar. See related thread in forum #134630.

Just saying, I really like this idea, and this is exactly the way I'd imagined it being implemented too.

I'd use it. Sometimes I get confused when I see an avatar and it's not the person I'm used to seeing with it, and then I cannot for the life of me remember who the other person's name was. Like a mind blank, it just teases me for awhile and I cannot quite remember the other person's name anymore. If it was in a little list on the image statistics, (just like the "favorited by:" list) then I could easily read through it and go "oh yeah! it was that person I was thinking of, that's what their name was/how it was spelled, etc". Plus I'd totally use it just for plain old curiosity, (to see which types of images no one's using, which ones are popular, etc). And if someone tried to use it to go dark side and harass someone, they'd get in just as much trouble as they would for any other kind of harassment. So I don't see much of a downside. /just some of the factors I can see. And why I like the suggested feature.

Requested feature: taggroup tag

Why it would be useful: if you want to see images that are based on other things you can add taggroup:copyright and only see images with copyright tags or alternatively you could do -taggroup:copyright if you don't want to see any copyrighted images.

(Sry, I don't know how to bold words)

Requested Feature: Option to ignore forum posts/comments by certain users, in a similar way to the current tag blacklisting (hidden by default, clickable link to reveal)
Why it would be useful: Certain users consistently post nonsensical/creepy/trollish comments. Flaming could be reduced by an ignore system.

LEGOEPIC: the bolding is BBCode-like: [ b ] some bold words [ / b ] (minus the extra spaces)