This was deleted already for poor quality. Now a moderator is posting it himself. Doesn't an act like this completely defeat the purpose of the queue in the first place?

Treveran said:

This was deleted already for poor quality. Now a moderator is posting it himself. Doesn't an act like this completely defeat the purpose of the queue in the first place?

The older post was not approved while it was in the queue, and only one of those who didn't approve it considered it poor quality. That's a far cry from saying it was deleted due to poor quality.

That post was also from twitter and has compression artifacts. This version does not, and some approvers would certainly not approve something they'd normally approve due to the presence of compression artifacts. In short, the answer to your question is: no, this doesn't defeat the purpose of the queue.

I do question why it wasn't added into the queue for moderation, when it even the poster puts the "bad anatomy" tag on it, however. The possibility it might be approved isn't the assurance it would be approved that skipping the queue from unlimited uploads is supposed to be used for.

NWSiaCB said:

I do question why it wasn't added into the queue for moderation, when it even the poster puts the "bad anatomy" tag on it, however. The possibility it might be approved isn't the assurance it would be approved that skipping the queue from unlimited uploads is supposed to be used for.

From my understanding, based on some user’s complaint on this post, the tags were merely copy/pasted from the child post. As the child post has the tag, it would of course also end up on this post. It isn’t uncommon for a user to end up including tags they likely would not have meant to use when copying a lot of tags from another post.

The uploader is cashing in their credibility and faith placed on them by bypassing the queue, but that is their call to make and their risk to take. They are also an approver and them bypassing the queue is them saying that if it was in the queue, they would have approved it. So your arguement on it not being assured is faulty because the uploader is saying they would have approved it, thus it was indeed assured.