It looks like the mods only look at, and approve, art that they personally enjoy. You can go back a few pages into the recent posts and see that some, but not all, of the new art has been approved.

Why not just do this fairly in a first-in, first-out manner?

Real reason I'm posting: something I posted 13 days ago, with 80 upvotes and 258 favs, still hasn't been approved. Did this fall through the cracks, or is this not meeting someone's standards?

You mean post #1807187.

Personally, I feel like there's something uncanny about it, but strictly from a quality perspective I'm a little surprised it hasn't passed muster yet.

how many times we are going to have this same thread? anyways im pretty sure that post has been sitting unapproved because its an edit, and honestly a bit sloppy edit, and so far none of the staff who has looked at it has been sure if it meets the quality standards or not

Feels like everyone is asking about approvals lately. Read some of these.
forum #270249 - Approval - 5 days old
forum #268191 - Uploads not being approved. - 1 month old
forum #263174 - Does the amount of votes a post have; Affect the odds of it being approved? - 5 months old

For your upload, post #1807187:
-no source
-edit
-twokinds edit
-poorly made edit

I went and deleted it for you.

Ruikuli said:
how many times we are going to have this same thread? anyways im pretty sure that post has been sitting unapproved because its an edit, and honestly a bit sloppy edit, and so far none of the staff who has looked at it has been sure if it meets the quality standards or not

What source(s) was it was edited from? I'm mostly curious to see for myself how much/little was changed.

There are 10 janitors and a handful of mods, and around 500 or so new posts accumulate per week. We also all have personal lives.

Basically it's quite a bit of work and we're not a super huge workforce, and everything stacks up eventually.

ikdind said:
What source(s) was it was edited from? I'm mostly curious to see for myself how much/little was changed.

dunno, but i know an edit when i see one. it looks like it was two characters stitched together from two completely different pictures that likely were sfw content

The best part is, the post was very popular and well-liked by fans of that material, and even inspired almost a dozen comments. If that doesn't vouch for "quality" by the people best positioned to judge it -- the fans -- I don't know what does.

Thanks.

hhrff said:
The best part is, the post was very popular and well-liked by fans of that material, and even inspired almost a dozen comments. If that doesn't vouch for "quality" by the people best positioned to judge it -- the fans -- I don't know what does.

Thanks.

justin bieber is super fucking popular, but it doesnt mean that hes good singer and that his songs should be played in fine musics festivals

same is here. this is an art archive site with specific standards for submissions. just because something is popular doesnt mean that its fitting for this site and it's purposes

ikdind said:
You mean post #1807187.

Personally, I feel like there's something uncanny about it, but strictly from a quality perspective I'm a little surprised it hasn't passed muster yet.

I have gotten so much hate from handling Tom Fischback posts that I have simply started to ignore them.

They are all extremely bad and they are constantly getting so much attention that when one of them gets deleted, it's always massive shitstorm.

I cannot tell why the artist just doesn't draw nipples to begin with so we wouldn't have this situation where almost literally everything they do is edited thrice if not more (where majority is just adding nipples and small line for pussy with ms paint) or those wanting these edits moving elsewhere when there starts to be more deleted posts than some artists have posts as whole: tom_fischbach status:deleted

Blind_Guardian said:
I went and deleted it for you.

Thank you. I'll pray for your dmail inbox to not get overwhelmed by this.

I'm sorry you personally don't enjoy Twokinds. I won't hold it against you. I might hate the art you enjoy, but I'm not inclined to treat approvals on e621 as if I was saving the art to my curated furry porn stash.

I could see deleting something that is "poor quality" if it's in the negative after a week or gets only a small handful of upvotes -- like some of the Twokinds edits that have been approved.

Man, people have gotten really whiny lately.

huh, so you are not gonna read at all what i said and you are gonna still whine about how unpopular content stays and popular doesnt? alright then.

I read it when you first posted it, but found your opinion completely unpersuasive.

This isn't your personal music collection, where you get to decide that Justin Bieber's music sucks (and it does, we can agree on that). Art should be approved without bias from the approver. Two hundred and fifty-eight users on e621 viewed my post and liked it enough to favorite it. In other words, someone -- several someones, in fact -- found it had merit.

Should that be the only criteria for approving a post? No. But it should be a factor that weighs in. I had no idea there was such an anti-Twokinds sentiment amongst the janitors.

hhrff said:
I'm sorry you personally don't enjoy Twokinds. I won't hold it against you. I might hate the art you enjoy, but I'm not inclined to treat e621 as if it was my personal, curated furry porn collection.

I could see deleting something that is "poor quality" if it's in the negative after a week or gets only a small handful of upvotes -- like some of the Twokinds edits that have been approved.

But, that wasn't the case with the post in question.

This is exactly the problem.
I'm indifferend about twokinds, I don't hate the art and I simply don't follow the lore. What I hate is the fanbois.

Problem becomes when the edit that is clearly againts our guidelines, gets uploaded and then all everyone who are into the whole series gets on it and simply do not care if it's bad edit. Staff coming in and enforcing the guidelines now feels like it's just staff being biased againts the series, creator and/or editor.

Because of course it will get fucking upvoted and favorited, because it's porn of twokinds, there's well established fanbase and there's fuckload of pornographic value. We can't just approve all twokinds stuff because it's twokinds or all stuff that's rule34 just because it's happening to be popular. That would be favoring content based on bias or fear.

Also, I have been retroactively deleting some twokinds edits, because they shouldn't have been approved to begin with, so has other staff. Just because something is approved, doesn't mean that they cannot be re-evaluated. This has also ignited discussions about edits as whole, to tighten things up further and I have personally even given out idea of maybe making edits that aren't disclosed properly an offence.

CCoyote said:
Man, people have gotten really whiny lately.

Alternatively more of them happened to magically find Forums button during same time period.

Alright. The art in question wasn't even my edit -- I found it on an imageboard, and in my estimation it was novel, unique, and enjoyable. The edit wasn't a minor variation on some other edit that had been posted a million times before.

I posted it here because I thought other fans might like to see it, too.

What can I do to bring the artwork into compliance? Was it the Comic Sans? I can fix that. ;)

hhrff said:
Alright. The art in question wasn't even my edit -- I found it on an imageboard, and in my estimation it was novel, unique, and enjoyable. The edit wasn't a minor variation on some other edit that had been posted a million times before.

I posted it here because I thought other fans might like to see it, too.

What can I do to bring the artwork into compliance? Was it the Comic Sans? I can fix that. ;)

Redraw it from the ground up so it's its own standalone image in high quality instead of just a really badly done copy and paste with minor smudging and deforming.

NotMeNotYou said:
Redraw it from the ground up so it's its own standalone image in high quality instead of just a really badly done copy and paste with minor smudging and deforming.

I can't tell if you're being serious or if that is tongue-in-cheek. Are you against edits in principle?

As cut-and-rotates go, it was pretty well done. The layout and positioning worked. The smudging and deforming is part of the craft, not a flaw. It wasn't JPEG'd to hell and back. But yes, it was an edit.

hhrff said:
Alright. The art in question wasn't even my edit -- I found it on an imageboard, and in my estimation it was novel, unique, and enjoyable. The edit wasn't a minor variation on some other edit that had been posted a million times before.

I posted it here because I thought other fans might like to see it, too.

What can I do to bring the artwork into compliance? Was it the Comic Sans? I can fix that. ;)

If someone else made it, and you found it on an imageboard, you should have sourced it there. You should have sourced the original either way as well. Most of the users here can't even see it to help explain / judge the edit's quality right now, because you failed to source. Only Admins and other users who can see deleted posts can see it.

Mairo said:
Alternatively more of them happened to magically find Forums button during same time period.

Blips, too. -.-

hhrff said:
I can't tell if you're being serious or if that is tongue-in-cheek.

I think that he's completely serious, and it does sound like the admins are starting to turn against edits in general.

I'm okay with that. I've had some fairly harsh things to say about edits in the past, myself. A *lot* of them do tend to be of noticeably worse quality than the originals. This particular image seemed okay-ish (to me, anyways), but I'm guessing at least someone saw it and felt it was borderline enough to not approve it (before you drew attention to it, that is). Even if it wasn't obviously done in MSPaint, it was still uncanny, things about it were definitely "off" in a way that I'm sure I could eventually describe objectively but I just don't care enough to try.

I'm certain I don't see upwards of 99% of the deleted or eventually-deleted posts on this site, and probably fewer still of the edits. Not least because I routinely include order:score in my search queries, and am not remotely interested to ever see the last pages of its results.

hhrff said:
As cut-and-rotates go, it was pretty well done. The layout and positioning worked. The smudging and deforming is part of the craft, not a flaw. It wasn't JPEG'd to hell and back. But yes, it was an edit.

it really wasnt a good edit or well done. if you can see miles away that its an edit, its not good edit.

ikdind said:
I think that he's completely serious, and it does sound like the admins are starting to turn against edits in general.

I'm okay with that. I've had some fairly harsh things to say about edits in the past, myself. A *lot* of them do tend to be of noticeably worse quality than the originals. This particular image seemed okay-ish (to me, anyways), but I'm guessing at least someone saw it and felt it was borderline enough to not approve it (before you drew attention to it, that is). Even if it wasn't obviously done in MSPaint, it was still uncanny, things about it were definitely "off" in a way that I'm sure I could eventually describe objectively but I just don't care enough to try.

Yeah, we've been much stricter about edits, mainly because people just do such lazy ones like ms painting a line to represent a vagina or really sloppy ms paint nipples, but also I and several others feel it's beneficial to the artists too, mainly because 99% of the time these are unauthorized edits to begin with.

hhrff said:
I can't tell if you're being serious or if that is tongue-in-cheek. Are you against edits in principle?

As cut-and-rotates go, it was pretty well done. The layout and positioning worked. The smudging and deforming is part of the craft, not a flaw. It wasn't JPEG'd to hell and back. But yes, it was an edit.

I'm very serious, it looks bad. I have seen good edits, but those edits are a lot more intricate than copying, pasting, and rotating different things. They tend to properly redraw entire parts of the image and emulate the style of the original artist so that it doesn't clash.

It's okay for a meme, but not in any way good enough to be hosted here on merit of its artistic qualities.

DiceLovesBeingBlown said:
... but also I and several others feel it's beneficial to the artists too, mainly because 99% of the time these are unauthorized edits to begin with.

Thank you, thank you, thank you. So much!

Fine. I can see the administration has their minds made up on the topic. I'll get my edit kicks on other imageboards that encourage that type of creativity and lightheartedness. You can all go back to pretending you're a curator at the Louvre.

I wasn't expecting this kind of hostility. It's obvious that the mindset predominating here is not representative of the userbase's enthusiasm for edits, based on their +fav and upvoting habits, but I can see we're not going to escape the little echo chamber we've got going on in this thread.

Good lord. . .

hhrff said:
Fine. I can see the administration has their minds made up on the topic. I'll get my edit kicks on other imageboards that encourage that type of creativity and lightheartedness. You can all go back to pretending you're a curator at the Louvre.

I wasn't expecting this kind of hostility. It's obvious that the mindset predominating here is not representative of the userbase's enthusiasm for edits, based on their +fav and upvoting habits, but I can see we're not going to escape the little echo chamber we've got going on in this thread.

quick question: why you are like this?

Ruikuli said:
quick question: why you are like this?

I'm wondering the same thing 'bout you, friend.

We should start putting Twokinds edits in the description or comments of the original version. That way they're still accessible to users as e6 policy on edits gets refined.

Ruikuli said:
quick question: why you are like this?

Everyone in here has been fairly polite to you, and yet you're being extremely aggressive in return.

You say you didn't do the edit, but also you are acting as though you're being personally attacked when people say that the edit was of poor quality.

Edits are allowed as long as they're both high quality and approved by the original artist. They're not discouraged; it's just that a fair few edits in a dozen tend to not be so good, which is the reason edits are slowly becoming frowned upon, along with the fact that people would rather see new original art than a slightly different version of previously-seen art.

Put it this way: would you rather see 1000 MS paint scrawls, or 75 well-done pieces of art?

A lot of certain types of people seem to think that their art, or an edit of someone else's that they performed, is a family member and that a criticism of them is a criticism of the creator and thus an attack, and not a helpful pointer in the right direction. It's not the fact an artist did something wrong, but what exactly wasn't so good with the art, that is the most helpful information to know, and thus help them improve as an artist. Learning the difference between constructive criticism and personal attacks is what makes or breaks your reputation, whether you're giving the criticism or receiving it. Sadly, a fair portion of the population at large still doesn't understand the difference, and will either think "this is crap" is proper criticism, or that "the linework is nice, but the shading could be improved" is an attack.

This doesn't have to apply to drawn art either, and can go for any sort of medium, whether it be a written story, a video game, a video or film, a piece of music, or otherwise.

There is also no lack of creativity on e621, either. There are hundreds of different art styles by thousands of artists on this website, and a fairly large portion of the art is humorous, plain weird, or light-hearted in some other way.

If a person edits an image, and that edit gets deleted, it's a reflection on the edit itself, and the skills of the editor. It has nothing to do with the uploader, unless the editor is also the uploader. I'm also sure that an editor wouldn't want another person being on the defensive on their behalf, because it can often be a poor representation of the editor, especially if the editor themself is fairly approachable and understands why the edit wasn't allowed. You are not uploading an image for the sake of showing off your uploading skills, because that's misplaced credit. Uploading the art is about the artist, not the uploader. (And commissions are a whole other can of worms that I won't get into)

In short, there was no hostility here. If you want light-hearted fun out of low quality edits, you're looking for memes, which generally do this sort of thing. While there are some meme images on the site, it's far from the primary focus of e621, and the fact that people are sometimes surprised that some websites have their own focus rather than allowing anything and everything, still baffles me to this day.

Clawdragons said:
Everyone in here has been fairly polite to you, and yet you're being extremely aggressive in return.

You say you didn't do the edit, but also you are acting as though you're being personally attacked when people say that the edit was of poor quality.

u quoted wrong person.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polemic

Ruikuli said:
u quoted wrong person.

Yes. I did that. You are correct.

Oops.

This discussion is starting to remind me of playing chess with a pigeon.

A person starts out by uploading low-quality art, takes personal offense when it's deleted, and then spends the next two pages throwing shade, being passive-aggressive, attacking people through private messages, and committing psychological projection.

I don't think the people responding to the question posed in the subject line and explaining the site's rules as they were asked to do are the ones responsible for creating a polemic here.

Your question was answered. The edit was not as good as you thought, move on.