Mod queue discussion

Posted under General

スラッシュ said:
This is the whole point of it.

Well, that's kinda stupid then. Did you even try to take a look at some users uploads?
If it's to avoid flooding in the queue, you can always hide posts as you check them...

Here's a suggestion. Why not remove the reason for sending the posts back to the queue altogether?

I see a few people complaining that the post being sent back to the mod queue have stupid reasons attached to them.

But frankly, shouldn't the entire team of mods be able to figure out why the picture was unapproved in the first place? If they can't, they'll simply re-approve it. Reasons are unnecessary when sending them back anyway. How valuable is the biased input of the single person sending them back anyway?

Tangentially, I've been surprised at some of the stuff that has been reapproved. I may not be the greatest judge of quality, but I've flagged some posts that I strongly suspect wouldn't make it through the normal mod queue, and most of them were instantly reapproved.
Is there deliberately a lower standard of quality for reapproving flagged posts than approving new posts?

Because it's a good filter to determine if the person flagging it is an idiot out to remove what offends them and someone whose removing something with a serious and logical reason.

Frankly I get annoyed when the reason for being flagged isn't defined properly, as allowing flagged images marked with bad reasons to be deleted (even if the image is bad) only, in my mind, encourages the person to flag further images for the same bad reason. Example, photoshop isn't inherently a reason for flagging, the important emphasis is that it's a crappy photoshop, but by allowing images to be deleted due to just "photoshop" can set precedents that all photoshops are to be deleted.

NWF_Renim said: Because it's a good filter to determine if the person flagging it is an idiot out to remove what offends them and someone whose removing something with a serious and logical reason.

Exactly. I want people to have to work to unapprove images. It's not supposed to be easy.

You only get 10 a day anyway, so why not take a few seconds each and justify your action? If not, you shouldn't even be allowed to unapprove images.

I'm curious - If a flagged image is not re-approved and is deleted after 3 days, will it display the default "unapproved in 3 days" -message or will it instead give the flagging comment as the reason for deletion?

Muey said: I'm curious - If a flagged image is not re-approved and is deleted after 3 days, will it display the default "unapproved in 3 days" -message or will it instead give the flagging comment as the reason for deletion?

Good question, I'm not sure. If it's the flagging reason, then all the more reason for them to be meaningful.

I think the unapprove system is stupid. Is it really going to hurt this site of those pictures stay approved? C'mon, think about it. The staff takes the website way too seriously.

The only thing that would make sense to me is to have the pictures unproved temporarily and only an admin (not a mod or janitor) can actually unapprove it permanently. Otherwise, it will just go back to being approved.

Fencedude said:
This, from they guy who called people who dared to suggest that breasts sagging down to a girls bellybutton may, in fact, not be very attractive, pedos.

Strong butthurt is STROOOOOONG.

Oh nice, a personal attack!

1 2 3 4