This morning I wanted to revisit a post that many others including myself really liked, only to find it was removed, and the reasoning was... shaky.
The post in question was this one: https://e621.net/posts/5129179

This was the reasoning behind the deletion:

No one on staff wanted to approve this, so right before this reached automod I gave it an artistic deletion. The main problem is that we would delete third party animation edits of this quality as trivial edits, so approving something similar but made by the original artist doesn't sit right. We also have all four parts of this post on the site in higher quality, which does bring inferior/duplicate considerations to mind, especially because this post added no new visual content and visual content is what we care about. Again, this post was going to be deleted, I only provided a reason.

(Please, do not harass anyone about this)

There are many issues here I feel the need to point out.

1.

No one on staff wanted to approve this

Why? Everybody agreed it shouldn't be on the site, despite it getting 600+ upvotes and positive comments?
Users liked it. Lots of users liked it. The target demographic of the site liked it.
I understand that quality control is needed, especially to combat potential botting, but this was not one of those cases.
The sound edit included voice acting, camera panning, sound design, animation. It's clear that a ton of effort and care was put into it.
Why did no one want to approve it? To me this reads as the staff's standard rising high above the reasonable level and letting that dictate their actions, rather than... the rules.

2.

The main problem is that we would delete third party animation edits of this quality as trivial edits, so approving something similar but made by the original artist doesn't sit right.

This one is just silly. It would be unfair to already deleted third-party edits if you... didn't delete a FIRST-PARTY EDIT????
That's like a bouncer saying "Hey, we just kicked that drunk guy out of the bar, and I know you're drinking responsibly but imagine how the drunk guy feels so you gotta go too"

3.

trivial edits

WHAT? In what world is THAT a trivial edit??? Like I stated above, voice acting, camera panning, sound design, animation. That is not "trivial".
"Trivial" is when you take the audio from a pornhub video and layer it over a static picture with nothing else.
What level of standard are the mods working from to deem that a "trivial" edit? Do you think so many people would enjoy it if it were so trivial?
Actual low quality posts do not get upvotes.

4.

We also have all four parts of this post on the site in higher quality, which does bring inferior/duplicate considerations to mind, especially because this post added no new visual content and visual content is what we care about

There is a lot to unpack in this one.
Yes, there are 4 other posts in high quality. However, the "inferior/duplicate" flag is invalid here, and I can back that up.
First of all, here is the uploading guidelines' standard for a quality edit, including if the post met those standards:

Edits of images need to be at least on the same level of quality as the original

-
https://e621.net/posts/5129180, one of the sibling image posts has a resolution of 828x714.
The deleted post has a resolution of 738x720, which is an incredibly small change in resolution to delete a post over, not to mention ignoring the clear differences the post has over it's siblings.

Low effort edits (adding stories, changing text, bucket fill coloring, cutting out parts, etc.) are not allowed.

- Met

Coloring "bases" (template images) are not permitted if they haven't been performed by the original artist of the base.

- Met

We will only accept up to ten (10) versions of any given base.

- Met

Neural network and AI edits are not permitted, regardless of type of edit (uncensoring, coloring, denoise, etc.).

- Met

Rotoscoping and photomorphs are only permitted if they completely transform the entire reference so that no part of the original remains visible.

- Met

If you feel an image of yours has been deleted unfairly, do not hesitate to contact us and ask for clarification.

- Yes I am doing this

Now, onto the "Inferior/Duplicate" clarifications.

Duplicate or inferior version of another post
A superior version of this post already exists on the site.
This may include images with better visual quality (larger, less compressed), but may also feature "fixed" versions, with visual mistakes accounted for by the artist.
Note that edits and alternate versions do not fall under this category.

The deleted post is obviously distinct from the sibling images.
Pay attention to the last line of that quote please.

Now, with all of that out of the way, here's the main point of this post.
Posts are being deleted due to subjective opinions rather than the circumstance of the post and the rules the site actively enforces and has laid out.
The solution to this is NOT to add more and more restrictions to the rules, because quality posts are being deleted and the rules are not the issue here.
In my honest opinion, the mods haven't done a good job at appearing unbiased when enforcing the rules. This isn't a dig at the mods or the staff, I'm just stating what I've seen and I think it does more harm than good.

My idea was a poll system. When a post gets flagged for not "meeting the uploading guidelines", it's given 24 hours (or some other amount of time) where users can vote on if the post should stay or be removed.
I've thought of some conditions for this system.

---Reset condition---
- The poll receives an insufficient # of votes by the end of it. In this case, the poll is reset along with the timer.

---Win condition---
- The poll has more positive votes than negative votes when it ends

---Lose conditions---
- The poll has more negative votes than positive votes when it ends
- The poll is reset x times

Polls could be moved to a designated page or subsection so they don't get lost in the sea of posts.
This would fix the problem I've often seen of some mods/janitors pushing their opinion as fact and disregarding the stated rules.
If nothing else, I just want actual legitimate reasons for posts being removed. Reasons that make sense, not reasons that are violently picky, not reasons that are subjective or biased, and not reasons that are technicalities that ignore all other context.

was this one of those things where they have a camera pan around a flat comic page? is that really what we're talking about here?

dba_afish said:
was this one of those things where they have a camera pan around a flat comic page? is that really what we're talking about here?

Ah, thanks for the context.
#

piano0000000 said:
My idea was a poll system. When a post gets flagged for not "meeting the uploading guidelines", it's given 24 hours (or some other amount of time) where users can vote on if the post should stay or be removed.
I've thought of some conditions for this system.

---Reset condition---
- The poll receives an insufficient # of votes by the end of it. In this case, the poll is reset along with the timer.

---Win condition---
- The poll has more positive votes than negative votes when it ends

---Lose conditions---
- The poll has more negative votes than positive votes when it ends
- The poll is reset x times

Polls could be moved to a designated page or subsection so they don't get lost in the sea of posts.
This would fix the problem I've often seen of some mods/janitors pushing their opinion as fact and disregarding the stated rules.
If nothing else, I just want actual legitimate reasons for posts being removed. Reasons that make sense, not reasons that are violently picky, not reasons that are subjective or biased, and not reasons that are technicalities that ignore all other context.

Fascinating system. Tell me how it applies here and how it's not effectively equivalent to already existing votes, which as you've stated doesn't negate the need for quality control.

dba_afish said:
was this one of those things where they have a camera pan around a flat comic page? is that really what we're talking about here?

Via the source listed, yes
It's the child posts compiled with panning and a voice, no new content
tbh I'm surprised it wasn't deleted near instantly, those are usually gone pretty fast
Ah, it was first party, I see why no one wanted to touch that

There isn't some bias against the post here, in fact there was the opposite
Were this a third party edit it would have been nuked near instantly, it only skated around because it was first party and likely no one wants to deal with that

The deletion reason "Duplicate/Inferior" fits here, it is both duplicate and inferior to the child posts which are already on the site

Moving the view around doesn't create new content, and audio is irrelevant
Thus, for all intents and purposes that post is just its child posts slapped together in a sideshow at a lower quality

Also OP, the users of any site (let alone a majority porn site) are the absolute worst determiners for what should or shouldn't be here
People don't care about quality, all they care about is what gets them going, and if that's a 300x300 jpeg with enough crust to surround a whole loaf of bread, then so be it
We'd be rife with paysite content and shitty edits of existing content scaled down 2 or 3 times smaller if we let users vote and decide

This one is just silly. It would be unfair to already deleted third-party edits if you... didn't delete a FIRST-PARTY EDIT????
That's like a bouncer saying "Hey, we just kicked that drunk guy out of the bar, and I know you're drinking responsibly but imagine how the drunk guy feels so you gotta go too"

You're actually getting this the wrong way around. The person "drinking responsibly" is being belligerent. They aren't kicked out yet because they aren't drunk.

Also I assume you'll accept this artist's first party edit of post #4559667: https://inkbunny.net/s/744675?

let alone a majority porn site

I assume you can call it a (majority) porn site now you're no longer staff?

piano0000000 said:
This morning I wanted to revisit a post that many others including myself really liked, only to find it was removed, and the reasoning was... shaky.
The post in question was this one: https://e621.net/posts/5129179

This was the reasoning behind the deletion:
(Please, do not harass anyone about this)

There are many issues here I feel the need to point out.

1. Why? Everybody agreed it shouldn't be on the site, despite it getting 600+ upvotes and positive comments?
Users liked it. Lots of users liked it. The target demographic of the site liked it.
I understand that quality control is needed, especially to combat potential botting, but this was not one of those cases.
The sound edit included voice acting, camera panning, sound design, animation. It's clear that a ton of effort and care was put into it.
Why did no one want to approve it? To me this reads as the staff's standard rising high above the reasonable level and letting that dictate their actions, rather than... the rules.

Upvotes or favs have zero say on whether or not a post becomes approved.
A post can have easily hundreds of upvotes, but it is AI, pirated content, plagarised content, illegal content, etc.

When nobody wants to approve or disapprove a post, it is because it falls into a grey zone for quality standards.
That means it will be passed around between janitors (who would sometimes leave a note on the matter for the next to read) until a consensus could be reached.

In this case, since nobody thought it was good enough to be approved, one of the janitors deleted it to put it out of its misery.

2. This one is just silly. It would be unfair to already deleted third-party edits if you... didn't delete a FIRST-PARTY EDIT????
That's like a bouncer saying "Hey, we just kicked that drunk guy out of the bar, and I know you're drinking responsibly but imagine how the drunk guy feels so you gotta go too"

Normally, edits by the artists themselves do get some preference over some random third-party_edit.
However, in this case, it was more like the artist reposting a third-party edit on their Twitter, so it is still a third-party edit in the end.

3. WHAT? In what world is THAT a trivial edit??? Like I stated above, voice acting, camera panning, sound design, animation. That is not "trivial".
"Trivial" is when you take the audio from a pornhub video and layer it over a static picture with nothing else.
What level of standard are the mods working from to deem that a "trivial" edit? Do you think so many people would enjoy it if it were so trivial?
Actual low quality posts do not get upvotes.

The quality standard levels are relatively stable, but can vary between mods. An approved post may get deleted by another mod in the future if it was deemed to be not meeting the current standards.
At this point, it did not meet anybody's standard since, I repeat again, "nobody thought it was good enough to be approved".

And again, upvotes mean nothing when it comes to quality or mod approval.

4. There is a lot to unpack in this one.
Yes, there are 4 other posts in high quality. However, the "inferior/duplicate" flag is invalid here, and I can back that up.
First of all, here is the uploading guidelines' standard for a quality edit, including if the post met those standards:
https://e621.net/posts/5129180, one of the sibling image posts has a resolution of 828x714.
The deleted post has a resolution of 738x720, which is an incredibly small change in resolution to delete a post over, not to mention ignoring the clear differences the post has over it's siblings.
- Met
- Met
- Met
- Met
- Met
- Yes I am doing this

Now, onto the "Inferior/Duplicate" clarifications.
The deleted post is obviously distinct from the sibling images.
Pay attention to the last line of that quote please.

None of these are relevant to the post.

Please refer to Bad things to upload under the Uploading Guidelines, and the Low quality submissions section.
The video was full of compression artefacts and did not improve in quality one bit from its already very compressed parent posts.

At this point, we already have the original static pictures which are the "best" quality we can get, so the animated version did not add much in that regard.
Thus, weighing in the pros (voice acted, animated but only marginally) and cons (no improvement over quality, significant visible artefacts), a judgement is made from there.

Now, with all of that out of the way, here's the main point of this post.
Posts are being deleted due to subjective opinions rather than the circumstance of the post and the rules the site actively enforces and has laid out.
The solution to this is NOT to add more and more restrictions to the rules, because quality posts are being deleted and the rules are not the issue here.
In my honest opinion, the mods haven't done a good job at appearing unbiased when enforcing the rules. This isn't a dig at the mods or the staff, I'm just stating what I've seen and I think it does more harm than good.

There is bias. You can't avoid it. The mod team, or more specifically the janitorial team, are made out of various people and each person would try their best to interpret the quality standards their way.
Sometimes, one post may get approved by a janitor while a similar one gets rejected by another. Some may have very strict standards while others have more leniency.

When arguments like this arise, it is not uncommon for janitors to consult each other or have more of them step in with their take on the judgement.
This can lead to posts being undeleted if it was deemed "good enough" or even posts being deleted after it was approved if it was deemed as "not good enough anymore".

That is why you are also encouraged to contact the "higher ups" (i.e., the head admin) if you want to contest a deletion, as they have the final say in things.

My idea was a poll system. When a post gets flagged for not "meeting the uploading guidelines", it's given 24 hours (or some other amount of time) where users can vote on if the post should stay or be removed.
I've thought of some conditions for this system.

---Reset condition---
- The poll receives an insufficient # of votes by the end of it. In this case, the poll is reset along with the timer.

---Win condition---
- The poll has more positive votes than negative votes when it ends

---Lose conditions---
- The poll has more negative votes than positive votes when it ends
- The poll is reset x times

Polls could be moved to a designated page or subsection so they don't get lost in the sea of posts.
This would fix the problem I've often seen of some mods/janitors pushing their opinion as fact and disregarding the stated rules.

Totally not going to be abused at all.

If nothing else, I just want actual legitimate reasons for posts being removed. Reasons that make sense, not reasons that are violently picky, not reasons that are subjective or biased, and not reasons that are technicalities that ignore all other context.

Raise the issue to the head admin if you don't like the mod's explanation.

If you want to see an edit done right, you can see post #4259779 as an example.

snpthecat said:
I assume you can call it a (majority) porn site now you're no longer staff?

I mean, it's just a factual statement
while e621 is not solely a porn site per se, the majority of users use it as such and most posts are (I personally consider much of questionable porn as well, so somewhere around ~60-70% of this site is porn in my eyes, close to 80% if you count EVERYTHING that isn't safe)

We weren't told as staff to not call it a porn site, I just parroted the argument everyone else did out of my own choice
I still am for the most part, but with a bit more give to be realistic

The points you make just aren't true.

• Low-quality art does get positive votes.
• Even putting aside low-quality art, irrelevant or AI-generated posts can be expected to consistently win any poll to overturn their deletion because people will just vote for these things even if they lack artistic value or furry relevancy: post #2291113, post #4975593, post #2302127, post #3010968, etc.

• Just because AverrBaverr published the edit does not mean they had significant involvement in its creation. Sometimes cartoonists publish/retweet translations of their comics, but that doesn't make them translators. You're going to need to meet a stronger standard of proof for this claim.

• The post is a trivial edit because the animation was already done. Panning/zooming is one of the most basic functions you can do in modern video-editing software. Voice acting is a skill which does require manual effort, but it is incredibly difficult to justify degrading a post because you wanted to add audio. A Vocaroo upload would legitimately be a better way to do this.

• The video is visibly worse than the source images because this is simply how raster graphics and video compression work. Data is actively lost when you resize a raster image because making images smaller removes color information, and making them larger alters the image by trying to blend between colors. Nothing short of vector art fixes this (because vector art is composed of infinitely-scalable curves rather than distinct pixels), and we're well-past the age of Flash animations being popular.

thegreatwolfgang said:
or even posts being deleted after it was approved if it was deemed as "not good enough anymore".

I would like to clarify your statement that the quality standards (and threshold for deletion) that will apply to the post is the quality standards at the time it was posted, that's why grandfathered content exists. So if the minimum quality threshold is raised, it won't retroactively affect everything before it. But if it's determined that a post egregiously violated the minimum quality standards of the time, it's fair game

snpthecat said:
I would like to clarify your statement that the quality standards (and threshold for deletion) that will apply to the post is the quality standards at the time it was posted, that's why grandfathered content exists. So if the minimum quality threshold is raised, it won't retroactively affect everything before it. But if it's determined that a post egregiously violated the minimum quality standards of the time, it's fair game

Yeah, grandfathered_content is a whole different category in on itself. The "not good enough anymore" line was mostly in reference to topic #43164 where an entire series of once-approved posts were deleted in bulk.

thegreatwolfgang said:
Yeah, grandfathered_content is a whole different category in on itself. The "not good enough anymore" line was mostly in reference to topic #43164 where an entire series of once-approved posts were deleted in bulk.

That was what I was trying to caveat with

But if it's determined that a post egregiously violated the minimum quality standards of the time, it's fair game

snpthecat said:
I would like to clarify your statement that the quality standards (and threshold for deletion) that will apply to the post is the quality standards at the time it was posted, that's why grandfathered content exists. So if the minimum quality threshold is raised, it won't retroactively affect everything before it. But if it's determined that a post egregiously violated the minimum quality standards of the time, it's fair game

We don't do rolling grandfathered content, our guidelines that we have right now apply to everything 2016 and beyond regardless of when the post was uploaded/the change was made, unless explicitly stated otherwise

The thing we usually don't do is go seek out absolutely everything for new guideline changes, the changes are applied as broadly as they can be in an automated fashion, and pieces are picked off later as time goes on

donovan_dmc said:
We don't do rolling grandfathered content, our guidelines that we have right now apply to everything 2016 and beyond regardless of when the post was uploaded/the change was made, unless explicitly stated otherwise

The thing we usually don't do is go seek out absolutely everything for new guideline changes, the changes are applied as broadly as they can be in an automated fashion, and pieces are picked off later as time goes on

Huh