S1eth said:
That's exactly what "unapprove" and "deletion appeal thread" are for.
If a good post dies in the mod queue -> appeal it.
If a bad post is approved -> flag it.
I'm not disagreeing with this, but as I say in this part they're rare in proportions because the site wants as little contestation from users as possible. I was hoping "unless they think they have a pretty good reason to make an appeal" was obvious enough for me not needing to make my post even longer.
glasnost said:
Fair enough, but if that's what you meant, then say that, not an alternative statement so perniciously annoying that we have a wiki page to deal with it.
I think I was clear enough with the next sentence ("But the policy tells you not to flag them because it's a dick move.").
There's an area between borderline quality relative to time and blatantly bad in which flagging posts for quality reasons is frowned upon because it's more harmful than helpful.
glasnost said:
This is certainly not a rule, and it's not even much of a convention. Flagging is done at the flagger's discretion, and that's the way it should be. Remember that deletion appeal remains an option even for flagged pictures, and if there are really several approvers who think these pictures are Danbooru-quality, they would find and reapprove them there.
I have (though I admit rarely) seen people getting flak for unwarranted flaggings, the worst case with a neg given for it ("impossible sarashi is not a valid reason to flag post X").
S1eth said:
Posts are evaluated on image basis. When flagging a post, you think the janitor+ made a mistake by approving THIS ONE image and ask for a second opinion. This is not related to other Janitors approving similar posts. If multiple janitors like the images, then why didn't they reapprove all/most of them?
glasnost said:
Your definition of "bypass" is not one I agree with. Any of the janitors could have reapproved any of these posts during the three-day float period, just as with any other flagged post.
When you flag a pool of 40 similar images approved (once more) by different reviewers, would you say all people involved made mistakes, some of them several times?
You're either questionning all of them at the same (which would require a very strong opinion on the matter), or attempting to redefine the quality threshold.
Also, how would I know why the posts weren't reapproved by their first approvers, without being them?
I can think of several reasons but how would you tell?
> You have to consider first that the posts are borderline. As such the approvers probably don't care a lot either way in the first place.
> Then you have the fact they're not simply pending but flagged. Pending posts are "approve if you like". Pending resent posts become "approve if you still like more than I dislike". If someone showed a valid complaint for the posts and you had no strong opinion on them you're probably going to let this person have his/her way.
> You have various reasons involving which janitors are available at the time the posts are resent, whether they still think the posts are as good as they looked at first, whether they even noticed them, whether they would have approved this couple of average images if they had known that a whole pool would follow, whether they feel cool with reapproving 40 pictures at once when they have no concertation with other janitors and think approving only a sample of the pool is meaningless.
> Besides, when images look similar wouldn't you think that having everyone reapproving each other posts would be no different from having them reapproving their owns? If you were indirectly told that you were wrong for approving stuff in this pool and are let with the possibility to reapprove the posts for which you weren't the first approver but which still look the same, would you do it?
You can't say that janitors are going to review the pool's elements independently when the statement instigating the flagging is "pool #1830 is mediocre and given the posts are all the same why would we allow survivors?" (forum #57520).
And finally you have to consider that the flagger is a mod, and not the laxest one at that. The flagger identity here is valuable to gauge how much the flagging reason is concevable and so how much you want to interfere.
So no, either way I don't think pool #1830 stood much chances of reapproval from the start. But what do you think would have happened if it had been flagged by a priv or contrib? I would suspect a reaction no different from what happened with rifyu.
S1eth said:
Posts should only become (temporarily) immune to flagging when they have been approved by at least 2 different janitors, mods, admins, but for some reason, undeleted images are immune as well.
I don't like this solution. Outside of the obvious abuses that happened with Seem I don't see why you would want to insist on deleting a post multiple times. It's just going to be sneaky (janitor who reapproved post X doesn't seem to be around anymore → flag again).
If it's so so bad that you think that, exceptionnally, the favorable opinion of 1, 2 or 3 reviewers isn't enough to make the post worth staying, you should just have a vote between everyone and make a one-time decision from the yes/no ratio.
