Note to staff: There should be a warning page when opening links to posts with blacklisted tags.
http://roxfox64.tk/bbq/warning.html <- Example

You picked a damn adorable post (post #218425) to be blacklisting... >_>

Is the fact that the thumbnail has big, bold 'BLACKLISTED' not enough?

Blaziken said:
Is the fact that the thumbnail has big, bold 'BLACKLISTED' not enough?

I think his complaint is more about links to the images (eg. post #159462).

Eh... personally, I'm more on the fence on this one. I do sometimes turn off blacklisted tags in search results for a reason...

Also, I could've sworn there was a forum thread for this kind of stuff already...

GreyMaria said:
You picked a damn adorable post (post #218425) to be blacklisting... >_>

Hey, I'm sure someone has blacklisted at least one tag that image has. Iunno why though.

I like the image quite much.

RoxFox64 said:
Hey, I'm sure someone has blacklisted at least one tag that image has. Iunno why though.

I like the image quite much.

girly, maybe?

Blaziken said:
Is the fact that the thumbnail has big, bold 'BLACKLISTED' not enough?

Not for text links, no.

I don't use the blacklist anyway. I'm enough of a man to put up with the crap that's in the way of my good porn.

RoxFox64 said:
Note to staff: There should be a warning page when opening links to posts with blacklisted tags.
http://roxfox64.tk/bbq/warning.html <- Example

A simple grayed-out text would be enough, I suppose. Anyway there will be more processing, reading post tags, reading blacklisted tags, comparing tags, tags, tags and tags. Did I mention 'tags'?

xLuna said:
A simple grayed-out text would be enough, I suppose.

Bad. This requires extra queries. Plus, what if someone uses the URL instead of "post #123"? That takes even more work.

Also, gray text is hard to distinguish. People are stupid.

You need to think about the suggestions you make and why exactly they would be wrong. <_<

I think the extra click-through would be a pain in the neck. If I click a link on this site, I'm accepting whatever's on the other side of the jump, even if it's something I've blacklisted.

Putting everyone else through extra click-throughs just to protect you from something you don't want to see is imposing an undue burden on others.

DobiesHot said:
I think the extra click-through would be a pain in the neck. If I click a link on this site, I'm accepting whatever's on the other side of the jump, even if it's something I've blacklisted.

Putting everyone else through extra click-throughs just to protect you from something you don't want to see is imposing an undue burden on others.

And then someone links to cub, someone who has cub blacklisted clicks on it, and the person who clicked on it gets jailed for pedophilia.

I think that's a little excessive a thing to implement. The blacklist is mostly to prevent massive amounts of something you don't want to see. It's not bulletproof and sometimes posts will get through. Likewise, sometimes people will post a link to something on your blacklist.

The blacklist, once again, is also there to prevent things like legal issues.

Like, y'know, child porn.

GreyMaria said:
The blacklist, once again, is also there to prevent things like legal issues.

Like, y'know, child porn.

There's that too. But as it affects the user it's mostly to block all the mlp and other flooding material

GreyMaria said:
And then someone links to cub, someone who has cub blacklisted clicks on it, and the person who clicked on it gets jailed for pedophilia.

GreyMaria said:
The blacklist, once again, is also there to prevent things like legal issues.

Like, y'know, child porn.

Okay, we get it. But rather than imposing hundreds of extra clicks on the majority of users who don't live in areas where drawings are seen as porn, you should just not follow blind links?

Alternatively, how about showing the tags when the pointer is hovered over the link? We already know that's possible in the thumbnails.

DobiesHot said:
Alternatively, how about showing the tags when the pointer is hovered over the link? We already know that's possible in the thumbnails.

That isn't very practical when the image in question has a very large number of tags. No one would want to comb through them just to see if any of them are on their blacklist.

So maybe use the tooltip to show just the warning?

Edit: I just realized that would make the warning useless when using the random button. I still prefer it over the original idea, though.

GreyMaria said:
This [route of using tooltips on the link] requires extra queries. Plus, what if someone uses the URL instead of "post #123"? That takes even more work.

EDIT: If you argue that using thumb #xxx makes this query already, I'm going to stab you. Common sense dictates that using thumb #xxx should be used with extreme discretion, because it puts that extra work on the server.

How on earth would this take a lot of extra effort?
Its just a very basic 'Does this post contain blacklisted tags?' Yes. 'Is the referrer *.621.net*?' No. 'Show warning page.'

RoxFox64 said:
How on earth would this take a lot of extra effort?
Its just a very basic 'Does this post contain blacklisted tags?' Yes. 'Is the referrer *.621.net*?' No. 'Show warning page.'

This is not how the internet works. At all.

DobiesHot said:
I think the extra click-through would be a pain in the neck. If I click a link on this site, I'm accepting whatever's on the other side of the jump, even if it's something I've blacklisted.

Putting everyone else through extra click-throughs just to protect you from something you don't want to see is imposing an undue burden on others.

Make it an option? Hell, it could even default to off, so you wouldn't even need to waste five clicks on turning it off.

GreyMaria said:
Bad. This requires extra queries. Plus, what if someone uses the URL instead of "post #123"? That takes even more work.

That's what I meant.

GreyMaria said:
Also, gray text is hard to distinguish. People are stupid.

I didn't say gray text, literally.

Snowy said:
Make it an option? Hell, it could even default to off, so you wouldn't even need to waste five clicks on turning it off.

Or don't implement it at all.

DobiesHot said:
Alternatively, how about showing the tags when the pointer is hovered over the link? We already know that's possible in the thumbnails.

Or just displaying "Blacklisted"? Nah.

I've added standard post tooltips (tags, rating, uploader) to post #xxx links in the next update. Might not help much with blacklists, but it seemed like a pretty cool idea. Maybe later I'll make it try to parse standard links as well, but we'll see. And GreyMaria stop talking like you know how things work.

GreyMaria said:
This is not how the internet works. At all.

You are very clearly not aware of how E621 is programed, and should probably stop talking like you DO know how its programmed, and leave it to the sites Programmers to explain how this stuff works.

tony311 said:
I've added standard post tooltips (tags, rating, uploader) to post #xxx links in the next update. Might not help much with blacklists, but it seemed like a pretty cool idea. Maybe later I'll make it try to parse standard links as well, but we'll see. And GreyMaria stop talking like you know how things work.

Well then, we're already getting the part that takes server resources. (I think. Blacklist processing is done clientside, right?) In that case, I can't really see an argument against implementing some sort of blacklist notification on post #xxx links.

I do kind of like the idea of changing the color of a post #xxx link that contains blacklisted tags, and I think that's a good compromise. I wonder what the database cost would be to ask for the taglist. Javascript can override the link color, right?

I just don't like the idea of having a click-through on the post's page itself. While it would be the ultimate means of preventing someone from accidentally viewing a blacklisted image on e621, no matter where they followed the link from, I would absolutely want to turn off such chicanery if it were implemented.

Snowy said:
Well then, we're already getting the part that takes server resources. (I think. Blacklist processing is done clientside, right?) In that case, I can't really see an argument against implementing some sort of blacklist notification on post #xxx links.

Blacklist processing is client-side, it's written in Javascript. But it may be a separate database query to retrieve a post's taglist than to retrieve certain other common pieces of data like what tony's just added to tooltips.

It just takes one query per post #xxx link to get its tags, and everything else is Javascript. I didn't think of coloring the link though. I'll look at it soon and see what I can come up with. It wouldn't make the post any harder to view, it'd just make the link look a little different so you know it's blacklisted.

Another idea, drawing upon some of my first dabblings into Javascript (way, way back when it was called "Dynamic HTML"):

If an appropriate link color can't be found, maybe the Javascript could append a small "(blacklisted)" to post #xxx links? That would potentially help colorblind users, and improve accessibility in case anyone who's using this site is disabled and using accessibility features on their browser or OS.

(I know the accessibility thing sounds silly, because the obvious accessibility feature in mind is text-to-speech for vision-impaired users, but I seem to recall reading something about plans to support fan-fiction or other written works at some nebulous point in the future, which may attract vision-impaired individuals.)

tony311 said:
I've added standard post tooltips (tags, rating, uploader) to post #xxx links in the next update. Might not help much with blacklists, but it seemed like a pretty cool idea. Maybe later I'll make it try to parse standard links as well, but we'll see. And GreyMaria stop talking like you know how things work.

Rox should stop acting like he knows what he's talking about either. The kid still tells me to get rid of the database schema.

Anyhow, tony's right, it isn't a bad idea, just one that hasn't been thought about much :)

ikdind said:
Blacklist processing is client-side, it's written in Javascript. But it may be a separate database query to retrieve a post's taglist than to retrieve certain other common pieces of data like what tony's just added to tooltips.

Well, my point is that tony mentioned that the taglist is already going to be retrieved ("I've added standard post tooltips (tags, rating, uploader) to post #xxx links in the next update." (emphasis mine)), so clientside processing of that taglist to check for blacklisted tags and alter the link's appearance wouldn't impose any load on the server. So I don't see why xLuna is arguing against it.

Snowy said:
Well, my point is that tony mentioned that the taglist is already going to be retrieved ("I've added standard post tooltips (tags, rating, uploader) to post #xxx links in the next update." (emphasis mine))

Oops. My bad. Completed missed the word "tags" in tony's post. So, yeah.