Okay as we all know "or at least I hope we all know" Uploading piss poor quality artwork and screen shots/scans IS against the rules so my question is why do some mods seem to approve them when they are uploaded? Isn't THAT against the rules as well? And before someone starts saying that i'm just trying to start trouble here is a nice long list of shit that shouldn't be here in the first place. "There is ALOT more than this I just don't feel like taking up 5+ pages listing them all"

http://www.e621.net/post/show/217241/cum-dinosaur-hearto-male-orgasm-penis-scalie-tongu
http://www.e621.net/post/show/217024/-animal_ears-brony-cat-clothing-cutie_mark-feline-
http://www.e621.net/post/show/214749/bad_english-cave-comic-groudon-kyogre-pok%C3%A9mon-wat
http://www.e621.net/post/show/215062/bdsm-blush-bondage-bound-breasts-canine-creete-dog
http://www.e621.net/post/show/208605/female-first_person_view-katdenyannyan-reptile-rpg
http://www.e621.net/post/show/206586/2012-beard-book-dialogue-discord_-mlp-draconequus-
http://www.e621.net/post/show/205851/ambiguous_gender-canine-cosplay-costume-feral-flar
http://www.e621.net/post/show/216592/blush-breasts-equine-female-lucky_luke-penetration
http://www.e621.net/post/show/214789/anal_beads-dildo-erection-gut-looking_at_viewer-ma
http://www.e621.net/post/show/209268/derpy_the_dino-dinosaur-e621-english_text-i_has_a_
http://www.e621.net/post/show/181823/drooling-face-meme-problem-purple-saliva-smile-ton
http://www.e621.net/post/show/108079/amazing-fish-marine-meme-moon-shark-stars-three_wo
http://www.e621.net/post/show/70372/ambiguous_gender-black_background-canine-dog-flesh
http://www.e621.net/post/show/56961/avatar-edit-james_cameron-s_avatar-looking_at_view
http://www.e621.net/post/show/14632/2007-ambiguous_gender-black_eyes-english_text-hybr
http://www.e621.net/post/show/3788/4chan-bdsm-bondage-bound-chargin-_mah_lazor-collar

Not looking for a fight or anything I honestly just want to know why mods don't seem to ever get in trouble for approving crap art but regular users seem to get in trouble or at least are belittled/insulted when they upload it the whole thing is just stupid in my opinion.

The upload process itself is the responsibility of the users. Approvals, however, are completely under the discretion of the administrative staff; they decide what belongs on the site and what doesn't. Even then, they are allowed to approve irrelevant or low quality posts if they see some redeeming characteristic in the work.

What the rules state is that you, as a user, should avoid posting low quality work as it is likely to be deleted. You are completely within your rights to upload "low quality" art; there are simply risks to doing so (i.e. a lowered upload limit, then a demerit, and ultimately a ban.)

So if something falls below upload standards, but you think there's some outstanding quality to it that warrants its presence on the site, go ahead and post it. Just hope that the moderator running approvals agrees with your reasoning.

Also, you really only get in trouble for uploading unapproved art if you do so repeatedly and frequently. If you pad your irrelevant and low quality posts with lots of relevant, high quality posts then most moderators aren't going to mind or even notice.

If an image was approved, chances are that means it's not against the rules.

Umm... Out of all the ones you've posted here, only one I'd consider low enough quality to be removed from the site... And it was because it had obvious compression artifacts..

But, umm, yeah.. KloH0und pretty much hit the nail on the head..
The decision, whether or not to keep or delete it, is up the the sites moderating and administrating staff. Chances are, if it was already approved, it's fine to stay..
'Course there are always mistakes, and things sometimes get overlooked, so the best thing you should do is pm one of the moderators and tell them about it..
Try to avoid using the FFD tool for that sort of stuff, though, since what you might consider terrible, might not be that bad, and you might get in trouble for flagging it.. (Unless it's completely obvious that it's pretty bad, of course.)

skeeter said:(Unless it's completely obvious that it's pretty bad, of course.)

Even then I'd use a lot of discretion. If your reasoning is anything along the lines of "I find it distasteful, low quality or offensive" then it probably isn't a good idea to flag it. It isn't our job to run quality assurance. If it got through then there's a reason.

muttzilla stated: "Uploading piss poor quality artwork and screen shots/scans IS against the rules so my question is why do some mods seem to approve them when they are uploaded? Isn't THAT against the rules as well?"

All comes down to which mod gets to it.

....I don't know either

skeeter said:compression artifacts.jpe.bmp

You should also be aware that post #108079 and earlier were all under the previous administration. And not every artist is ABD or Meesh. And though I'm not an admin or mod, I think post #214749 is perfectly acceptable quality. Not great, but not remotely worth deleting.

Muttzilla said:
http://www.e621.net/post/show/209268/derpy_the_dino-dinosaur-e621-english_text-i_has_a_

And this got deleted, reason: "Substandard quality of art."

¯\(°_o)/¯

Also, you can link to posts by using post #1234 if so desired

KloH0und said:
"The upload process itself is the responsibility of the users. Approvals, however, are completely under the discretion of the administrative staff;" they decide what belongs on the site and what doesn't. Even then, they are allowed to approve irrelevant or low quality posts if they see some redeeming characteristic in the work."

But doesn't approving images that the vast majority of users would call poor quality kind of clash with the rules that are in place to keep poor quality posts in check and in doing so would it not kind of defeat the purpose of the rule in the first place? It just kind of confuses me because it's a big bundle of mixed signals that will make some weary of posting anything other than masterpieces and will encourage some others to post every single thing they can find regardless of quality or revelance to the site. I for one think the rules could use a slow and steady going through kind of like weeding the garden if you know what I mean.

Muttzilla said:
But doesn't approving images that the vast majority of users would call poor quality kind of clash with the rules that are in place to keep poor quality posts in check and in doing so would it not kind of defeat the purpose of the rule in the first place? It just kind of confuses me because it's a big bundle of mixed signals that will make some weary of posting anything other than masterpieces and will encourage some others to post every single thing they can find regardless of quality or revelance to the site. I for one think the rules could use a slow and steady going through kind of like weeding the garden if you know what I mean.

The rules on "Low quality" are subjective to whatever moderator sees them first, if one mod approves them their likely to stay unless a census between the mods finds the approving mod overwhelmed 2v1 to those who want it gone.

Princess_Celestia said:
The rules on "Low quality" are subjective to whatever moderator sees them first, if one mod approves them their likely to stay unless a census between the mods finds the approving mod overwhelmed 2v1 to those who want it gone.

Well what I guess I am trying to say is that there needs to be a meeting of the minds and ground rules need to be set for what is okay and what is a nono because i've seen several things that shouldn't be here get approved only to be later deleated by another mod, wouldn't it just be easier to have a set of quality control ground rules to keep that from happening?

But doesn't approving images that the vast majority of users would call poor quality kind of clash with the rules that are in place to keep poor quality posts in check and in doing so would it not kind of defeat the purpose of the rule in the first place?

The point I'm trying to make is that it isn't a rule; it's a guideline for users.

We're sending mixed signals because it isn't clear-cut. When we say "quality" we mean anything that has at least some degree of finish and artistic or creative value to add to the site.

...wouldn't it just be easier to have a set of quality control ground rules to keep that from happening?

It would. But we'd also be missing out on a lot of content that a lot of users happen to enjoy, even if it isn't furry or of exceptional artistic quality.

As I said, it isn't that big a deal most of the time. You'd have to post a lot of unapproved work to get in trouble for it.

On that note, I was wondering why 2 posts were deleted. post #212153 was deleted for being sideways, even though the artist probably printed it like that, like with post #212156. And post #217119 was deleted for being irrelevant. How is an MLP/TF2 crossover irrelevant?

KloH0und said:
The point I'm trying to make is that it isn't a rule; it's a guideline for users.

We're sending mixed signals because it isn't clear-cut. When we say "quality" we mean anything that has at least some degree of finish and artistic or creative value to add to the site.

It would. But we'd also be missing out on a lot of content that a lot of users happen to enjoy, even if it isn't furry or of exceptional artistic quality.

As I said, it isn't that big a deal most of the time. You'd have to post a lot of unapproved work before punitive administrative action would be brought down.

I for one have no problem with low quality images that are low quality for the sake of a good joke but if it's just low quality because someone can't draw or edit for shit then it should have no home here, And demotivational posters should be allowed IF AND ONLY IF they are actually funny "like the one I posted that has over 50 likes" The same should apply to memes and such because most memes are completely retarded and only a little kid would laugh at them though some are pretty damn funny. It would be nice to get the opinions of some members as well.

Raiden_Gekkou said:
I was wondering why 2 posts were deleted. post #212153 was deleted for being sideways...

Those aren't deleted. At least not anymore.

And post #217119 was deleted for being irrelevant. How is an MLP/TF2 crossover irrelevant?

That was deleted for being a meme. Memes receive penalties on their saving throws during the approval process.

KloH0und said:
Those aren't deleted. At least not anymore.

It shows it as being deleted for me.

Raiden_Gekkou said:
And post #217119 was deleted for being irrelevant. How is an MLP/TF2 crossover irrelevant?

if it isn't furry or even worse isn't furry and is poorly executed then it is irrelevant to a furry site and as such must be executed to keep innocent eyes safe from harm. :>

Muttzilla said:
if it isn't furry or even worse isn't furry and is poorly executed then it is irrelevant to a furry site and as such must be executed to keep innocent eyes safe from harm. :>

I'm sure that Princess Luna counts as furry.

as I said earlier memes and demotivational posters that are actually clever funny and catchy should and most likely will find a home here.

Raiden_Gekkou said:
I'm sure that Princess Luna counts as furry.

mlp has nothing to do with the furry fandom. It's just a little girls show that has been blown out of proportion and as such spams this site with dozens upon dozens of uploads per freakin' day. -.-'

Muttzilla said:
mlp has nothing to do with the furry fandom. It's just a little girls show that has been blown out of proportion and as such spams this site with dozens upon dozens of uploads per freakin' day. -.-'

This is not a furry site. It caters to being anthropomorphic. My little pony is anthropomorphic. That is why it's here. As for it being a little girl's show, irrelevant. Use your blacklist if you do not like seeing it.

More on topic, if there are 10 pages with crap art here then that isn't even half of one percent. Poor quality isn't a big issue because it's relatively uncommon.

Rainbow_Slash said:
This is not a furry site. It caters to being anthropomorphic. My little pony is anthropomorphic. That is why it's here. As for it being a little girl's show, irrelevant. Use your blacklist if you do not like seeing it.

More on topic, if there are 10 pages with crap art here then that isn't even half of one percent. Poor quality isn't a big issue because it's relatively uncommon.

anthropomorphic animals walk on two legs like a human not on all fours. The ability to speak does not make an animal anthropomorphic.

Muttzilla said:
anthropomorphic animals walk on two legs like a human not on all fours. The ability to speak does not make an animal anthropomorphic.

an·thro·po·mor·phic    [an-thruh-puh-mawr-fik] adjective 1. ascribing human form or attributes to a being or thing not human, especially to a deity. 2. resembling or made to resemble a human form: an anthropomorphic carving.

Talking is an inherently human attribute, no? Anthropomorphization is not limited to physical characteristics.

KloH0und said:
an·thro·po·mor·phic    [an-thruh-puh-mawr-fik] adjective 1. ascribing human form or attributes to a being or thing not human, especially to a deity. 2. resembling or made to resemble a human form: an anthropomorphic carving.

Talking is an inherently human attribute, no? Anthropomorphization is not limited to physical characteristics.

The word origin*

1827, from anthropomorphous (1753), Anglicization of L.L. anthropomorphus "having human form," from Gk. anthropomorphos, from anthropos "human being" (see anthropo-) + morphe "form" (see morphine). Originally in reference to regarding God.

an·thro·po·mor·phize verb transitive verb: to attribute human form or personality to intransitive verb: to attribute human form or personality to things not human

Words change over time.

And it certainly isn't 1827 anymore.

KloH0und said:
an·thro·po·mor·phize verb transitive verb: to attribute human form or personality to intransitive verb: to attribute human form or personality to things not human

Words change over time.

And it certainly isn't 1827 anymore.

..... Those words are where the modern word came from. -.-'

Muttzilla said:
..... Those words are where the modern word came from. -.-'

Gay used to mean happy.

Walk into town talking about how gay you are and see how people interpret it.

KloH0und said:Talking is an inherently human attribute, no? Anthropomorphization is not limited to physical characteristics.

They do walk upright sometimes too.

Thanks for the help but let's leave mlp out of this; it's not the heart of the issue

It does not and has never mattered what the word "anthropomorphic" means or what it was derived from as far as this site is concerned. If you don't like MLP, blacklist it. If you don't like ANYTHING, blacklist it. End of discussion, this is not a debate.

Muttzilla said:
The word origin*

1827, from anthropomorphous (1753), Anglicization of L.L. anthropomorphus "having human form," from Gk. anthropomorphos, from anthropos "human being" (see anthropo-) + morphe "form" (see morphine). Originally in reference to regarding God.

Oh hey, we're using definitions from the nineteenth century now! Maybe we ought to remove the gay tag from post #175663, because neither one of them really looks very happy.

an·thro·po·mor·phism
The attribution of human characteristics or behavior to a god, animal, or object

Does not specifically state that it has to be walking on two legs, it could be any characteristic(s) specific to human beings.

The rules are loosely written for a reason, tight rules create loopholes, loose rules are a better bet.

We have guidelines for uploading, and the big ones are the following;

* upload high quality art
* ask the copyright holder before posting
* tag things correctly

don't follow them and things can and more than likely WILL be done to your account. Even deletions have negative results

Aurali said:
The rules are loosely written for a reason.

If I remember right, mellis also said something along the lines of "If there were rock solid rules then people would always be trying to skirt the edges of them. Keeping it hazy keeps people on their toes."

Next person to bitch about the definition of "anthropomorphism" and related words gets stabbed with a rusty trout.

http://www.e621.net/post/show/208605/female-first_person_view-katdenyannyan-reptile-rpg

I can't believe what I just saw. I finally found something I did not expect on the internet.

This thread has become lulzy.

Princess_Celestia said:
This thread has become lulzy.

Eh, not that much.

Raiden_Gekkou said:
Eh, not that much.

Lulzier than it was before. Before it was just sad.

In a nutshell. E621 has only two SOLID rules. Two rules that shant be broken for any reason, less the righteous fury of the admins come down on you like a burning screaming elephant from the heavens.

1. Do not Upload Jeremy Bernal, or sexy fur. Ever.

2. Don't be creepy.

You forgot don't abuse the ffd tool. It couldn't be any clearer not to use it for personal reasons, it's literally spelt out, yet people can't stop clicking it.

Rainbow_Slash said:
You forgot don't abuse the ffd tool. It couldn't be any clearer not to use it for personal reasons, it's literally spelt out, yet people can't stop clicking it.

God help your miserable soul if you abuse the FFD.

KloH0und said:

Memes receive penalties on their saving throws during the approval process.

Their THAC0 sucks too.

Actini said:
God help your miserable soul if you abuse the FFD.

Because the mods sure wont help your soul >:D

Rainbow_Slash said:
You forgot don't abuse the ffd tool. It couldn't be any clearer not to use it for personal reasons, it's literally spelt out, yet people can't stop clicking it.

no matter what we do.. people will abuse that tool.

Period.

Aurali said:
no matter what we do.. people will abuse that tool.

Period.

Invent a program that analyzes if it's a valid reason then explodes the user's head if it isn't. Problem solved.

Actually I have been thinking about it and perhaps you could make it so that you have to pick a reason from a list rather than filling out a reason. Also have "I'm the artist and I want it taken down" as an option and have it auto-redirect to the takedown request form or turn into a takedown request by itself

Transportation said:
That's an interesting idea, actually.

However, would adding an "Other (please specify)" option completely nullify any benefits of it, assuming that its benefits even outweigh its drawbacks?

Not necessarily. An other option would be abused too much so I was thinking of an in between. After you select your reason you can add an optional note. This would make the ffd process go smoother because the mod would look at the reason and see if it matches the case. I fit does match, it's deleted, if it doesn't match, banned. No more deciding.

It would just really help because it could say under the options "Don't see your option listed? Then you probably shouldn't be flagging this."

We've discussed it before, and we decided we don't really need anything like that. Things get flagged rarely enough that handling them isn't an issue.