What is it, at this point, about approvers trying to remove that comic?

1. The quality is consistent with the rest of the comic.
2. The image quality is clear.
3. The words are legible.

So why is there always 1 or 2 people freaking Scrooging the comic? And better yet; why are they allowed to do so?
It's clear, at this point, that they just don't like the comic. So why are they allowed to hate-boner the comic? It's clear bias.
If I hated cake; I would not review bakers making cakes, because my answer would always be 'I don't like it', even if it was the most amazing cake in the world.

The bottom line is that the approvers who hate the comic EVERY TIME a new one is posted need to be told to approve other things & stay away. It's not professional or healthy for them to keep saying 'I hate it' every. Single. Time.
There's a difference between 'I honestly don't think this meets quality standards' and 'I'm going to say this does not meet standards EVERY TIME, even though I'm always over-ridden! For the past 2 years and nearly 100 comics; I have been wrong! But THIS TIME, I will be right!'
It's a clear hate-boner for the comic, and anyone THAT biased should not be reviewing that particular thing.

Looking at the deletion reason, it appears that most of them were deleted for that it was a bad digitization of a traditional comic, and only a very few were because if it being an inferior version of an existing post. And looking at your post history, all your deletion reason were pay site content.

Hard disagree. FIL is definitely always straddling the line between "approvable" and "not approvable". If anything, it's probably getting a pass because of how long it's been around. There's no shortage of similar posts under comic delreason:*quality* hassource:true.

cutefox123 said:
Looking at the deletion reason, it appears that most of them were deleted for that it was a bad digitization of a traditional comic, and only a very few were because if it being an inferior version of an existing post. And looking at your post history, all your deletion reason were pay site content.

I'm talking about the ones that are being flagged but never deleted.

lafcadio said:
Hard disagree. FIL is definitely always straddling the line between "approvable" and "not approvable". If anything, it's probably getting a pass because of how long it's been around. There's no shortage of similar posts under comic delreason:*quality* hassource:true.

Why? It's not low quality. A person's personal opinion on the comic is not a valid reason to moderate it.
Again; nothing about how it is drawn or posted is low quality. It's just a simple art style.
And 'simple' does not mean 'low quality'.

euadonis said:
Why? It's not low quality. A person's personal opinion on the comic is not a valid reason to moderate it.
Again; nothing about how it is drawn or posted is low quality. It's just a simple art style.
And 'simple' does not mean 'low quality'.

To suggest that an art archive with a manual quality-based approval process has no space for "personal opinion(s)" is to fundamentally misunderstand what "quality" is in the first place, and, "It's (my/their) style" is not a valid defense against criticism.

euadonis said:
Why? It's not low quality. A person's personal opinion on the comic is not a valid reason to moderate it.
Again; nothing about how it is drawn or posted is low quality. It's just a simple art style.
And 'simple' does not mean 'low quality'.

That is debatable.

Foxes in Love's style is very minimalistic, and e621 is an art archive, not a comic archive. It makes sense to require a minimum of detail; you won't see any comic depicting stick people with cat ears here*, even if the writing wins a Nobel in Literature.

*post #19512 and similar are grandfathered content and would be deleted if uploaded today.

gattonero2001 said:

*post #19512 and similar are grandfathered content and would be deleted if uploaded today.

To be fair, I would think that one is more "not relevant" than "bad quality".

Wow. What an insane overreaction.
I already spoke about that matter here, so I won't repeat myself to much.

Foxes in Love is barely acceptable, and more than one staff member thinks that we should not be hosting simplistic doodles like that.
Stop spreading conspiracy theories about "just one approver who hates these comics and marks them as unacceptable out of spite".

How about just bookmark the FIL twitter and enjoy the comic, instead of ranting and attempting to dictate how the site is run because the world isn’t revolving around your petty wishes? JFC, I am so sick of the users on this site constantly throwing a tantrum because some shitty doodle wasn’t approved or they can’t follow simple rules.

jfrankparnell said:
How about just bookmark the FIL twitter and enjoy the comic, instead of ranting and attempting to dictate how the site is run because the world isn’t revolving around your petty wishes? JFC, I am so sick of the users on this site constantly throwing a tantrum because some shitty doodle wasn’t approved or they can’t follow simple rules.

Good lord, dude, take a xanax before you pop a blood vessel.

Heaven forbid a fan of something get frustrated seeing 'this does not meet approval' every time there's an upload on something they like. Christ.
But I guess you using insulting terminology like 'throwing a tantrum' and ranting' over what was a thoughtfully-worded post shows loads about you. Moreso when you, yourself are ranting over how you're sick of people doing things you don't like.
I did not realize I'd anger you, and I did not realize I needed your approval to make a thread. I'll try to read your mind next time and see if you approve of my threads before I make them, since you clearly think you're the center of the universe.

Also; having them here is an easier format to read than twitter. But I gues sthat did not enter your head when you decided to rant about how I was somehow ranting.

Dude, you were the one ranting, saying mods need to be kept away from doing their job. And then you responded to someone pointing out you are acting like an entitled child by ranting like an entitled child. also, you don’t need my permission to post, just like I don’t need your permission to point out your childishness. I hope for the sake of the people around you that you don’t respond like this every time things don’t go you way. You sound exhausting. But thanks for proving my point in my “rant.”

As one of the disapproves of this comic.

I don't think it meets the quality standard often because of the following reasons:

• Wobbly lines, unconnected lines and overlapping lines.
• Constant reuse of the same pose over and over again.
• Objects are often drawn worse than the characters.
• Small but noticeable inconsistencies in character design from panel to panel.

While it may sounds like I hate the whole comic, i don't. the dialogue makes the comic sweet and sometimes funny.
but if you ignore the dialogue and focus on the art, it's just not good enough for E621 in my opinion.

jfrankparnell said:
Dude, you were the one ranting, saying mods need to be kept away from doing their job. And then you responded to someone pointing out you are acting like an entitled child by ranting like an entitled child. also, you don’t need my permission to post, just like I don’t need your permission to point out your childishness. I hope for the sake of the people around you that you don’t respond like this every time things don’t go you way. You sound exhausting. But thanks for proving my point in my “rant.”

People like you always make me laugh.
You stomp into threads, insult everyone, and scream about how everyone is wrong and blah, blah, reeee!

My post was how I felt one mod was clearly moderating something they hated, as Foxes In Love was clearly being allowed, so clearly saying 'This does not meet approval' every fucking post for 2 fucking years seemed off. You know; as if someone had a vendetta against it. And normal people informed me otherwise.
Then you scream into the thread with how I'm screaming (I was not) and I was ranting (I was not. My post was thought-out and I tried to avoid being insulting). And suddenly I'm wrong, your right, and I was screaming because you said so.

Get fucked, child. Don't go screaming into someone else's thread about how 'entitled' they are when they start a proper discussion, while you flail like a toddler being told he can't have cake, you utter bell-end.
I don't have the patience to be polite to idiots like you. If all you can do is scream at others, then act like you were in the right because your head is that far up your own ass; then just shut your fucking mouth. Because I won't let you think you were right when you came in here acting like a cunt.

slyroon said:
As one of the disapproves of this comic.

I don't think it meets the quality standard often because of the following reasons:

• Wobbly lines, unconnected lines and overlapping lines.
• Constant reuse of the same pose over and over again.
• Objects are often drawn worse than the characters.
• Small but noticeable inconsistencies in character design from panel to panel.

While it may sounds like I hate the whole comic, i don't. the dialogue makes the comic sweet and sometimes funny.
but if you ignore the dialogue and focus on the art, it's just not good enough for E621 in my opinion.

That is a fair opinion. I just thought 'Did not meet quality standards' meant something like; The image being blurry, or improperly resized. Or the dialogue being hard to read, or full of typos.
Things that made the image a chore to actually see properly.

It did not occur to me that there was some sort of actual requirement of detail.