https://e621.net/post?tags=tpirman1982&searchDefault=Search

My gut says that this artist's work does NOT meet minimum quality standard. The anatomy is atrocious, it's done in MS Paint, and he's flat out told me on AIM several times that he sometimes traces.

I've seen the phrase "minimum quality standards" crop up in the deletion log. Would he be below them?

post #250176

quack quack.

And yeah, this shit is pretty damn bad..

The line of minimum standard is mysterious and fickle, depending on the whims of the admin reviewing. I'd say tpirman is cutting the line pretty close, but I've seen much worse getting approved in the past.

post #187000 post #393817 post #85907

And I remember seeing much worse, but can no longer find them. The standards do seem a lot stricter than just an year ago... and I'd say that's a good thing.

I think I am going to go ahead and delete the worst of these presented here. Our standards are indeed up a bit more (at least mine personally are) but really the main problem is that it's very hard to see detail from a tiny thumbnail and when you have 200 pending posts waiting in the queue at once, you don't have time to go through and open each one

That being said, if ever you find a post is of such bad quality that you feel it no longer has a place here, do not flag it, instead, contact me and I'll take a more in depth look into it

Rainbow_Dash said:
I think I am going to go ahead and delete the worst of these presented here. Our standards are indeed up a bit more (at least mine personally are) but really the main problem is that it's very hard to see detail from a tiny thumbnail and when you have 200 pending posts waiting in the queue at once, you don't have time to go through and open each one

That being said, if ever you find a post is of such bad quality that you feel it no longer has a place here, do not flag it, instead, contact me and I'll take a more in depth look into it

Well, that explains why easily-distinguishable variations of an image with descriptions stating that fact end up getting deleted as duplicates, if you don't even look at the things you delete.

Foobaria said:
Well, that explains why easily-distinguishable variations of an image with descriptions stating that fact end up getting deleted as duplicates, if you don't even look at the things you delete.

That is exactly why that happens, and I'd like to apologize in advance. It doesn't happen very often because most of the time I have the time to open both in tabs and compare, and read the comments fr any special instructions, but sometimes when large amounts of posts are flagged at once, some are mistakenly deleted. It's never been a problem past that though as I always get a message telling me the it was deleted by mistake and I fix it immediately.

Point well taken though, and I've been making an effort to just devote more time to fully researching each deletion

Rainbow_Dash said:
I think I am going to go ahead and delete the worst of these presented here. Our standards are indeed up a bit more (at least mine personally are) but really the main problem is that it's very hard to see detail from a tiny thumbnail and when you have 200 pending posts waiting in the queue at once, you don't have time to go through and open each one

That being said, if ever you find a post is of such bad quality that you feel it no longer has a place here, do not flag it, instead, contact me and I'll take a more in depth look into it

I always open all posts and look at them.
And FF crashes at ~310 open tabs. (I'd really like to know why because it s definitely not due to not enough RAM)

Foobaria said:
Well, that explains why easily-distinguishable variations of an image with descriptions stating that fact end up getting deleted as duplicates, if you don't even look at the things you delete.

I dunno if this is the same case but I sometimes delete shitty and pointless edits as duplicates. Or if someone recolors one image to represent all 300 mlp characters...