Hello everyone,

We're announcing some new rules and policies we're going to be implementing soon.

For now, I'll just be giving an outline of what we're planning to do. The main points are that we're going to be instituting a limit of 2 or 3 manip posts per day, per user, while significantly reducing the scrutiny we put on such posts.

The intent here is to maintain a higher level of quality on the site by evening out the rate at which quick and dirty edits and more involved works are posted, while avoiding subjective judgements on which ones are suitable for the site.

We will be maintaining the QCC, but its duties will be limited to judging on issues of image quality, such as artifacting, jagged edits, unreadable text, etc.

We need to review a lot of stuff to make these changes, so it may take some time, but please bear with us. I'll make a news post once things are finalized.

Thank you. Though I'm sad the situation got out of hand, I'm happy the site moderators and QCC were able to reach a solution where users have clear rules and guidelines rather than a vague "quality" threshold. Though I (thankfully) wasn't affected by the "low quality" flag spam, I think most manippers would rather have a daily posting limit rather than deal with constant flags.

This is nice, especially since I it scales back qcc from taking offense with things such as the art style or coloring.

It looks like the limit will only come into play for edge cases, but isn't uploading too many images in one day already mostly covered by the Bulk Posting Guidelines?

Also keep in mind that this won't prevent someone from theoretically banging out 20+ manips in a single day and gradually uploading them over the course of several weeks.

Ultimately, while this may increase the perceived quality of quick and dirty edits, I believe their actual quality will largely remain the same.

The point of this isn't to increase the quality of manips. Its to stop the witch hunt of manips by changing the rules.

Whoever's flagging bad manips is probably going to continue flagging bad manips, if that's what this is about. But if it means fewer bad manips overall, I'm on board.

If person in question keeps flaaging manips for no reason shouldnt the person get banned or at least told to stop? Because we cant let this get any worse for the reason it will discourage people from here and that is not good

Which is kind of the goal from what I gather. Because there isn't really a reliable way between differentiating between a fast technique and a good technique, when it comes to quality.



Depends because part of this is lowered quality control. In theory, someone posting 3 manips a day is going to have time to see their work get judged on the front page, and the effect of having that work reviewed by angels and paragons of niceness in the community is probably going to be an incentive to improve.

At the same time with the lowered quality bar, there's a good chance that flag does nothing without, basically, a wave of bad blood and outcry from the community keeping it raised. At that point it isn't on QCC to be art critics but rather quality control, and the community has more agency in the decision when something gets fragged.

I don't mind the solution, just as long as it isn't the end of the conversation. If there's anything I've learned it is that people will surprise you. I think there's a little bit of room to be more generous and you could also be a bit more brutal... but as for which to do best to wait awhile and see what people make of new rules.

This is very good news to hear. Gives me hope for the mod team, and the site in general honestly.

There's one thing left I'd like an answer to, which might be tied into this quote.



What will happen with the big wave of deleted manips from right before the earlier thread? Most flagged/deleted for "qcc" some even without a reason.
i.imgur.com/L1BeVLE.png

We've seen rules apply retroactively on here before, I figure this should apply in the same way yeah?

Are the rules against "walls of text" and manip signatures still in place?

Suppose I have a multi-image story manip, but the first few images don't have hypno. Am I allowed to post up to the hypno part all at once, or am I allowed to put the non-hypno parts up first one day and then wait until the next to release the hypno ones if it exceeds the post limit? Or can I just not post the set at all?

The intent is to bottleneck manips on something other than effort so that even if someone makes 30 low-effort manips in one day, they can't flood the site with them. This way, they're encouraged to post their best work every day. Making more manips on following days will just lengthen the backlog.

Since the bottleneck on high-effort manips is effort, they shouldn't be as affected by this rule since it takes longer to make them. This way, we narrow the difference in the number of high- and low-effort manips without making a judgment on what those categories actually are.



My current thinking about walls of text is to require all posts to be at least 50% image. Since we're primarily an image site, I think this makes sense. Restrictions on text readability still need to be considered, but I'm leaning toward not having them for now.

The manip signature rule isn't really relevant to these changes; it's intended to keep artists from seeing their work as being presented under another person's name rather than for quality reasons. We can look at the rule, but I don't think we'll be removing it.



I'm working on some tooling that will help us work with grandfathering rules, so I'm anticipating that these rule changes should just be applying to posts going forward.

A percentage of image being text can be a problem, as image size and font size can easily make the same 300 word short seem to be 75% of the image or 15% of it. In fact, a person could upload a very high resolution image with perfectly readable 2000 word story in a 12 point font that only takes up 10% of the image's space.

Without going so far as to restrict font sizes and font choices, a percentage of image rule would end up having a subjective result, even if enforced objectively. I think readability would probably be a better metric. I do kind of wish people who write a lot of text would put the text on the bottom rather than trying to fit the whole story on the side of the image, often forcing the viewer to scroll their screen side to side to read each line.

and then you have cases of pedantry where the image is just barely under 50% image and someone with far too much time on their hands decided to break out the ruler

and also, on the other side, if you have a huge story, here's a suggestion: write the first bit on the image then have a note that the story continues in your first comment; if it is a manipped image, you could likely get away with having the whole story in the comments

The big wave of recent qcc deletions that caused all of this discussion should be reviewed though.

Not gonna ask you guys to go through all the old deleted posts, but it really feels unfair to buddyboi and icontrol in that regard.