How about an "artistic quality" rating additionally to the Score? To have an rating that is less Subjective and more independent from the actual Contend of the Post. For example this Post has an Negative Score while the artistic quality is not that bad.
Edit: Or this or this or one, just to give some examples.

Uhhh, that'd be just as, if not even more subjective.

I don't really see this would be any more indicative of artistic quality than score is already.

I have also seen some more niche stuff get downvoted just because it's niche stuff which majority of users dislike. So I get the idea behind this suggestion, but that wouldn't solve the issue.

Best way to approach it is to make people blacklist the stuff they dislike, but good luck with that I suppose. If everyone of those users added "blood", "death", "gore" and/or "guts" in their blacklists, those posts wouldn't have almost any downvotes.

I'm assuming that the aim here is that the score should match to how well a picture is made as opposed to whether or not someone likes the content, as this generally ends up with the ickier kinks receiving lower scores. However, an important problem that arises under this system is that more well-known artists receive more score votes. Unless proper weighting is applied, loose sketches by popular artists will most likely end up with a higher artistic merit score than a well-drawn piece by someone obscure.

+1 for blacklist defaults gore, scat, watersports, inflation, and maybe rape.

leomole said:
+1 for blacklist defaults gore, scat, watersports, inflation, and maybe rape.

but we would somehow find a way to make users realize right away that they have those tags in blacklist so we dont get angry scat fans because they cannot find scat

Mutisija said:
but we would somehow find a way to make users realize right away that they have those tags in blacklist so we dont get angry scat fans because they cannot find scat

Well that would be a great way to teach people how to use their blacklists.
They would have some examples there, and incentive to change them.

+1 for default blacklist.
And I would start with "rating:e" actually, with gore/vore/scat/etc following that.

Also +1 for applying default blacklist to guests.

No to the default blacklist.

Making it more obvious and encouraging it to users to blacklist (and how to) would be good. But definitely not a default blacklist.

NotMeNotYou said:
No to the default blacklist.

Making it more obvious and encouraging it to users to blacklist (and how to) would be good. But definitely not a default blacklist.

If we do have a default blacklist, make it purely -rating:s so that it's super obvious in that way. They have to access the blacklist to view anything beyond safe rating.

Nah on the default blacklist. How will users discover new fetishes to get into? :V

TheHuskyK9 said:
Nah on the default blacklist. How will users discover new fetishes to get into? :V

BE OPEN MINDED

post #740181

Lukey3332 said:
How about an "artistic quality" rating additionally to the Score? To have an rating that is less Subjective and more independent from the actual Contend of the Post.

This sounds really interesting, as well as potentially useful

I'd really like to be able to measure a post's thematic rating as well at level of 'standard' competency

-

Qmannn said:
The problem with quality is that it's little more than a matter of personal taste with something like art.

I agree in the philosophical sense [wikipedia], but there do exist established fundamental concepts of visual art [wikipedia] which are applicable to almost every piece of work to some extent

---
All that said, it's still going to be more or less subjective at the end of the day, unless we have intentions of playing art police and infracting site members for not paying enough attention/knowing about fundamental art theory.

But it would streamline the intent somewhat, if site members are a bit more agreed upon in purpose on what they're using the rating system to measure

-

NotMeNotYou said:
Making it more obvious and encouraging it to users to blacklist (and how to) would be good. But definitely not a default blacklist.

Agreed, not really sure if the best solution is to hide the content in the first place, unless it's made clear to them from the start that posts are being hidden

A really nice example of this being handled is the way Derpibooru does it with their 'filters' system. Which seems to work for their intended purposes

-

TheHuskyK9 said not:
How will users discover new fetishes to vote down, harass the artists/uploaders about, flag because it offends them, pollute the comment section with complaints that could be avoided otherwise, and generally cause drama for those who are positively interested in the blacklisted content :V

Uh-huh

(On a less sarcastic note, finding new fetishes is great though, and I believe e6 is in a somewhat unique position to safely facilitate that, but not at the cost of incivility imo)

Furrin_Gok said:
If we do have a default blacklist, make it purely -rating:s so that it's super obvious in that way. They have to access the blacklist to view anything beyond safe rating.

If something resembling a default blacklist setting ever gets implemented, this would be an interestingly-effective way of ensuring site members would definitely be aware of it, cuz muh furry prons etc.

I'm actually all for a default blacklist if, and only if, it comes with some sort of tutorial for new users

I was actually writing about default blacklist items, but it doesn't work with site like this were you see stuff even without account. It works better on sites like sofurry, fa, inkbunny, etc. where smexy stuff is hidden by default. And that's basically only default blacklisting that would work.

If users can't use blacklist now, they most certainly will be angrier when they can't see content they want to see. Also it becomes subjective matter that what would be blacklisted by default.

Promoting the blacklist may be better way. Limiting downvotes that can be given per certain period (would make people less likely to open images just to downvote) or having some sort of popup when downvoting first time are maybe the least aggressive ways.

I mentioned it somewhere in the long version of that post above, but Derpibooru's Filters are an interesting implementation of the blacklist function

https://derpibooru.org/filters

There's a 'default' filter, which is custom tailored to suit the site's function:

https://derpibooru.org/filters/100073

NotMeNotYou said:
No to the default blacklist.

Making it more obvious and encouraging it to users to blacklist (and how to) would be good. But definitely not a default blacklist.

I propose a mandatory default blacklist for guests, and/or a message on account setup asking you to create a blacklist out of commonly blacklisted tags.

The mandatory default blacklist would help persuade the guest to make an account, and the blacklist setup message would forcibly show them the blacklist function, ensuring that no one won't know about the blacklist.

I think an artistic quality rating could potentially end up causing a lot of drama on posts, possibly even leading to artists requesting DNP and removing all their work.

Kind of like how some artists don't want their work here because of the twys policy causing their characters to have tags they don't agree with, I can see artists being offended by being tagged with an art level they disagree with.

If your objective is to be able see certain types of fetish or extreme art more accurately sorted based on quality/popularity, you can do a sort by "favcount" instead of score; Negative favorites can't be given, so doing sort:favcount should give you a better measure of how well the actual fans of that type of content like it.

Crispix said:
Kind of like how some artists don't want their work here because of the twys policy causing their characters to have tags they don't agree with, I can see artists being offended by being tagged with an art level they disagree with.

i think i might've seen that happen with a post i commented on the other day. it was black and white (black with white lines)and the character in question looked to be holding a tube of some sort, presumably a condom judging by what it was pouring on it's face. anywho, the artist had it tagged milk then i changed it to cum since, what kind of milk comes from a tube? followed by said artist changing it back to milk claiming milk had a double meaning as cum. well, it might in slang but i doubt it does in TWYS and later he flagged it to be removed. >.>

treos said:
<words>...followed by said artist changing it back to milk claiming milk had a double meaning as cum. well, it might in slang but i doubt it does in TWYS and later he flagged it to be removed. >.>

Yeah.... I think some people just straight up have an extremely hard time understanding or coming to terms with the point of tagging on e621. They tend to assume that it's trying to alter and control the content of the art, as if adding a tag is physically changing that piece of art, or that the tags are assaulting their creative control over the work. They have a hard time accepting that tags are just labels for searching and indexing to help people find apparent things in pictures per their expectations, and have no deeper meaning beyond that.

The tag for "Female-bodied character in picture has a visible penis and balls, but no visible vagina" could just as easily be Category_322 or Blarglfugh3215 as is it could be dickgirl for all it actually matters to the picture content, but some people will continue to feel like it's a personal attack on their property when their fully clothed herm gets a female tag.

The example you posted is particularly egregious though: How can someone possibly take offense to a tag-based website wanting to use consistent standard terminology for those tags? ffs.

Crispix said:
stuff

pic in question cum or milk?

artists, much like fans, come in all flavors. some can't or don't want to understand or learn how the tagging system works here. others can't take any criticism at all, good or bad, and may rage at such things. and then theres also the type of people who flip their shit over the tiniest most insignificant comment. pretty sure i've seen some of each over the years though in this particular case it didn't result in a DNP for a stupid reason. no one likes when that happens.

treos said:
artists, much like fans, come in all flavors. some can't or don't want to understand or learn how the tagging system works here.

Wikipedia 'elements of art' article says:

1 Form
2 Line
3 Color
4 Space
5 Texture

I would be interested to see a system that allowed rating on these three dimensions. However, they are prone to misinterpretation IMO. For example, having clean, balanced shapes might be thought to be under 'form', to the artistic layman, while it would actually fall under line (at the micro scale) and space (at the macro scale). Or for color, heavy handed 'neon colors' getting higher 'color' score because there 'is more color'. Or for space, a crowded image that conveys an excellent sense of space getting a low 'space' rating because there isn't much space, in a literal sense, in the picture.

In regards to the OT on TWYS: IMO, the majority of people either have no real appreciation of what a tag ontology -is-, of how important definitions are to maintaining consistent tagging, or believe that their definition is obviously the correct one. This is pretty well illustrated when you look at tagging pretty much anywhere that isn't e621.

titanmelon said:
Uh-huh

(On a less sarcastic note, finding new fetishes is great though, and I believe e6 is in a somewhat unique position to safely facilitate that, but not at the cost of incivility imo)

You need to stop altering quotes. Also, if they are doing all of that, they need to update their blacklists themselves or we'll eventually ban them.

savageorange said:
In regards to the OT on TWYS: IMO, the majority of people either have no real appreciation of what a tag ontology -is-, of how important definitions are to maintaining consistent tagging, or believe that their definition is obviously the correct one. This is pretty well illustrated when you look at tagging pretty much anywhere that isn't e621.

Yeah, it's unfortunate, but that seems to be the standard case across 'most' sites that use tags

Not really sure what to do about this that's not already being done

----

TheHuskyK9 said:
Also, if they are doing all of that, they need to update their blacklists themselves or we'll eventually ban them.

I agree, but banning people isn't going to encourage them to use said blacklist any more than they are now. Not to mention new members.

Unless, it's ok to vote down content you haven't blacklisted purposely if you don't complain about it as well? Because that seems to be the current policy

titanmelon said:
I agree, but banning people isn't going to encourage them to use said blacklist any more than they are now. Not to mention new members.

Unless, it's ok to vote down content you haven't blacklisted purposely if you don't complain about it as well? Because that seems to be the current policy

Well then that's too bad. They have the resources to learn what is a blacklist, how blacklisting works, how to apply tags to the blacklist and use it accordingly. If they aren't putting the effort to do that then they should expect consequences. Especially since the very first thing it says on the signups page (https://e621.net/user/signup) is "By creating an account, you are agreeing to the terms of service." which says that they should've already read the rules.

Also, users are free to downvote whatever they want. Some users have an impasse of not liking a post but not wanting to add it to their blacklist. That's okay, but if they are constantly complaining on posts, then other users should report it and we'll handle it.

TheHuskyK9 said:
They have the resources to learn what is a blacklist, how blacklisting works, how to apply tags to the blacklist and use it accordingly. If they aren't putting the effort to do that then they should expect consequences.

You give too much credit to average users.

And "average users" may very well include artists.
Who suck at tagging more often than not, and one can't blacklist if one can't tag.

Think of all takedown requests you will not have to approve because the artists would not find their nice clean picture sitting one-click apart from something as gross as an average e6 post. Takedown form is easier to learn (and discover) than the blacklist.

Sites like DA and FA rely much more social networking aspects for art discovery, and get a kind of implicit filtering from than. And even there they prefer to apply some sort of default filters for explicit posts.

savageorange said:
Wikipedia 'elements of art' article says:
[..]
I would be interested to see a system that allowed rating on these three dimensions. However, they are prone to misinterpretation IMO.
[..]

Didn't notice this part at first, but this is probably closer to the thing I was talking about in forum #187672

Being able to give some sort of 'tactile' feedback to the various basic elements of visual art.

Then interesting things could be done via metatag searches

And others

But like you said, the average site member is not likely to be aware of such things, far less possess a thorough understanding to use it as intended

-
Maybe in the future we can have an explanation for the various terms as used by the site in someplace, and direct members to read that before using the system

They had to learn about blacklists and voting, which are both enforced by site rules against abuse.

I don't see why they can't learn about alternate rating systems as well

i agree with many of the debaters. especially on the points of what makes art stand out. it's all about 1 Form
2 Line
3 Color
4 Space
5 Texture

O.k. so it doesn't look like such an rating/score will be implemented. So how about an special search tag/option, which elevates/neutralizes the Score of an Post if the Post is tagged with an specific Tag?
Like:

Lukey3332 said:
O.k. so it doesn't look like such an rating/score will be implemented. So how about an special search tag/option, which elevates/neutralizes the Score of an Post if the Post is tagged with an specific Tag?
Like:

Tag	Pseudocode
elevate_score:<tag>:<value>	if ( tagged(<tag>)) then score += <value>
elevate_score_if_neg:<tag>:<value>	if ( tagged(<tag>) && (score < 0)) then score += <value>
neutralize_tag:<tag>	if ( tagged(<tag>)) then score=0
neutralize_tag_if_neg:<tag>	if ( tagged(<tag>) && (score < 0)) then score=0

The idea of a user setting that adds points to the score if there are certain tags has merit. One column for the tag name, one column for the positive or negative number. It is better as a setting like blacklist and not a search operator.

There could be performance issues, because searching by score would need to take into account your tag modifiers.

Bottom two are not needed. Blacklist could fill in for neutralize_tag:<tag> and a large positive modifier for neutralize_tag_if_neg:<tag>.

Theoretically you could get most of what you want with searches like ~gore ~score:>10, but the OR syntax is broken.

Lance_Armstrong said:
The idea of a user setting that adds points to the score if there are certain tags has merit. One column for the tag name, one column for the positive or negative number. It is better as a setting like blacklist and not a search operator.

There could be performance issues, because searching by score would need to take into account your tag modifiers.

A partial sort could address that (similar to the way blacklist currently works) -- The server could return posts in the exact same order as it does now, and clientside javascript could automatically adjust scores (and re-sort the items on the page if applicable) . If the idea is to sort by score, this would be a decent compromise (you wouldn't get the 'absolute best' on the first page per your specific criteria, but you would get an ordering of 'best per your criteria' to 'worst per your criteria' on each page)

Mairo said:
I have also seen some more niche stuff get downvoted just because it's niche stuff which majority of users dislike. So I get the idea behind this suggestion, but that wouldn't solve the issue.

Best way to approach it is to make people blacklist the stuff they dislike, but good luck with that I suppose. If everyone of those users added "blood", "death", "gore" and/or "guts" in their blacklists, those posts wouldn't have almost any downvotes.

Good day sir/lady,I'm trying to upload my material to the page but I can't do it because someone is erasing it, claimming it doesn't meet minimum quality standards, could you help me and explain why is it so?
https://e621.net/post/show/2126690/3d_-artwork-blue_body-digimon-digimon_-species-dig

https://e621.net/post/index/1/flamdragon1-

FlamDragon1- said:
Good day sir/lady,I'm trying to upload my material to the page but I can't do it because someone is erasing it, claimming it doesn't meet minimum quality standards, could you help me and explain why is it so?
https://e621.net/post/show/2126690/3d_-artwork-blue_body-digimon-digimon_-species-dig

https://e621.net/post/index/1/flamdragon1-

Necroing a years old irrelevant thread to complain about this is probably not the best possible way to go on about it, especially when there is a stickied thread exactly for this purpose:
https://e621.net/forum/show/235851

Petition to lock all threads that are 3 (or 2?) years or older to avoid necro

yFlash said:
Petition to lock all threads that are 3 (or 2?) years or older to avoid necro

There is the little issue that sometimes there is actually good reason to necro old threads.

why is that threads not touched for three years keep getting necro? it's oddly specific.

Some sites have a "This thread hasn't been posted in in X time. Posting in it may be considered necromancy." warning, and also a confirmation dialog for posting your reply, which activates only if that banner is present.

Which seems like a pretty decent answer to the problem, considering that, as Pakattu says, there can be legitimate reasons to necro.

There are legit reasons to necro threads, but... yeah...