Why does it have to be a necessity for the user to have to upload the original image before flagging a sample anyway? Isn't it the point that they want something to be reviewed for approval regardless of if it's a sample or not? If it's good enough, someone who would approve it would upload and replace it anyway. At the very least, that's what I would do.
I find it odd that one would have to basically potentially sacrifice their uploading record just so they could get something reviewed. I think NWS has a point here that even with the artifacting it's just poor quality in my opinion. I would not approve this, even if it were the original -- but just saying it's a requirement to upload the original image breaks from what is laid out in image sample, much less howto:flag.
Approver’s dilemma for sample post quality and relevance checks:
If I want to approve a post because it meets the quality standards or is relevant / on topic, this is normally not a problem. However if this post is also a sample, approving it is pretty senseless. So there are two options for me: The first one is to write a comment like “QC passed” (see post #1884351) and contact the uploader. But this can of course fizzle out because no one notices the comment or the uploader is no longer active. This would result in the deletion of good quality or on topic posts. To prevent this I can only reapprove the sample and wait for someone else to upload the original file. Finally I would be able to approve the new post and delete the old one. The second option is to upload the original myself. But then I won’t be able to approve the upload (unless I have unrestricted uploads) and therefore can’t fulfill my original intend (to approve the image).
As a workaround I am going to notify an unrestricted uploader or a mod in such a scenario so that I can be sure someone not affected by the above described dilemma had a good look on the flagged sample post.
Mikaeri said:
[...] -- but just saying it's a requirement to upload the original image breaks from what is laid out in image sample, much less howto:flag.
howto:flag wiki says under "Reasons to Flag a Post":
The post is a lower quality image sample and a higher quality version has been uploaded.
image sample wiki says under "What to do when finding a sample":
Before uploading the full version of a sample, make sure that the post abides by Danbooru's quality guidelines. If you believe such a sample does not, flag it instead.
To be fair with disclosure, he wrote the image sample wiki. It's somewhat poor for argument sake to reference your own writings when citing existing rules or similar. Having something that would show outside support or input, such as a forum thread or comment thread, would be significantly better to cite in such cases.
I'll open up a topic on it then, but I find it sorta pointless to have to upload an original just to give it fair review when under new circumstances the post might go deleted anyway. So I wrote that with what I thought best described how to moderate samples.
Just my 2c, but at this point I'm mildly miffed by the confusion.
