I find the irony a little vexing but a solution is a solution.
I like this idea as it manages to keep true to the democracy of the Hub without putting any particular group of standards and interests down. I suppose I'm happy as long as the Hub becomes a place where the members can collectively decide what kind of content they'll allow on the site.

first Van, school should come first... enjoy your time with us, but life is more important, & we're not exactly exploding for a resolution

second, I'm actually opposed to what is effectively a direct democracy poll on a pic

imagine a situation where the vote is 51% to 49%; now 49% of the people are unhappy with the decision. This represents an extreme situation, but it illustrates the problem; if the majority, for example, doesn't like water sports, they could call for polls and eliminate them

Most people might be happy, but a significant number may not be

with the "prelim" or "bad" art tag, people still have access to the pics, but it also becomes easy for those that don't like them to avoid them

this isn't to say there aren't pics so bad, they need eliminating, nor is it to suggest the minority should in turn control the majority, but I don't want to feel steped on by the majority either

there could also be a lot of logistical problems.... a 50/50 vote, who gets to call for the poll, how many people actually bother to vote, whether votes can be changed if someone changes their mind, whether someone can come in much later, [either because of being busy, or just joining] and vote.... although, perhaps these questions are just borrowing trouble

While I think that the bad art tag is a much better idea, if you're going to go with the polling system, I suggest you probably shouldn't make the threshold for deletion 50%. Instead maybe 65-75% for all of the reasons that Grim suggested above.

May i just restate how i don't see the need for any revisions? Could you give me a stat on how many images even come up for judgement? More images seem to be deleted over resolution issues than quality control problems

Having a close vote is sometimes the nature of democracy, but since the image isnt getting deleted and just tagged it shouldnt cause as much of a flame war as other attempts have shown.

We should also make deletion an option for extreme cases, like 99% of people say they dont like an image.

As for the situation of people not noticing polls when they go up we can start a sticky thread that updates everytime a vote is in place.

And to keep things fair polls should stay active until a fair amount of people have voted. If one person votes and a piece of bad art stays it would be illogical.

As long as I am admin, I will never, NEVER support the "bad_art" tag idea. I'll have more to say later about all the things discussed here so far, but I wanted to say that right now.

Low resolution is a low quality issue.

Since I have no one to talk to tonight, again, I guess I'll do some replies now. First of all, to explain why I will never support the "bad_art" tag idea, it's because I find that to be far more insulting and, perhaps even worse, patronizing than simply deleting an image. It's like saying "your art can stay, but it will be forever marked as inferior to the other posts." I also feel like it sort of defeats the point of having QC at all. Our QC policy exists as much to encourage improvement as it does to discourage low quality. The idea is to make people try harder to get their pics accepted. With something like this, I see artists either getting insulted and quitting or becoming complacent with having their art tagged as such and not doing anything to improve. We already offer the forums as a place for people to post their art if it is not ready for the index.

Now, onto other things.



While it's true that not many images get put up for judgment, the issue is that it takes a very small number of people under the current rules to save a pic from deletion: as few as 2 and only as many as 5. Consider also that there are ~6 users that favorite almost every new image that gets posted and more users sign up daily. It's less that there is a problem NOW, and more that there can easily be a problem later. Be PROactive, not REactive.



I could see that problem if everyone on the site voted, but even if an anonymous poll convinced more people to participate, I'd be shocked if the turnout was very large. Also, it would still just be us mods that decide what goes up for judgment, and we're not going to start a witch hunt on tags we don't like.



I honestly don't like the idea of using something external for this. I know that's kinda silly, but it just seems like unnecessary trouble. I like having everything self-contained. Plus, I'm doubtful we could find something that would tell us for certain that no one was voting more than once.

I'm actually warming up to the QC council idea more and more.

I kinda like the QC council idea too. I remember making a similar suggestion before.

I admit it would take some work getting it up and running but it would take a lot of preside of you and vann.

You could make them have limited admin powers, basically enough to deal with QC but not enough to run the site as a whole.

And have it where as admins you can overturn them if need be to prevent anyone from being biase or something

PS: I agree about the bad art tag being a very bad idea as it is a greater insult then being delet as it says your art sucks and only exists here cause it barely passed screening.

When you put it like that, the bad_art tag does sound like a bad idea...

There's a world of difference between people who just sign up to build a favorites gallery and people who are willing to actually stand up and say "I don't want to see this deleted." That self-imposed barrier to participation is what keeps everything from becoming chaotic. Like the vast majority of websites that aren't super-colossal, our "active user" base is going to be small compared to the "user" base, and getting two votes from amongst active users (e.g. users who bother to comment and work the forum) is a safer threshold than you're making it out to be.

Again, the problem is less that it is being abused, and more that it can be abused, very easily. We can't rely on a self-imposed barrier to hold forever.

In all honesty I don't particularly like the QC council idea much, myself. While I see the idea as a way to keep decisions impartial I also don't like the idea of taking power away from the "active user" base. So to the end of preserving that power I've come up with yet another idea!

Some people seem to like the rules as they are and some want change. I want the members to be able to decide the type of content they allow on HypnoHub. So how about we no longer count the simple "love it"/"hate it" posts for anything and instead we only count the posts that have actual well thought out responses.

Now, stay with me because it gets a little complicated:
When users want an image kept or removed they must list their reasons in number list format. Each point they make will be 1 point towards their cause of saving or removing an image. Naturally, after a 24 hour period, the greater number of points will decide whether the image stays or not. In the event of a tie the image is saved. Mods will over see the debate of an image and decide which points are valid and which points may be discredited. A point can be made to discredit another point if this point is valid in doing so. Once an image is saved it may not be put up for expulsion again unless new relevant overwhelming information regarding the image's quality relevance or legal matters is brought forth.

If you do decide to use the "preliminary_art" tag (which I really think we should) all of those images should be excused from QC.

This Topic is pointless in finding a solution, because there is none. I will give everyone credit though for trying, because it is always worth at least talking about something, even if there's no good solution.

It all boils down to personal preference. If I had to do the judging, and I am happy that I don't, I'd vote 8 out of 10 pictures for being bad (and I am being generous here) - and my blacklist already filters out between 50-66% of all images.

That being sad, and probably being branded an asshole by the majority who read this, I have to say, that I would NEVER shit on the effort ppl are putting into it. Even though some work might be bad, they worked hard for it and who am I or you to judge, that it isn't worth at least showing it to a couple of ppl.

That being said, quality control IS a good thing (wow, contradicting myself again, that's already 2 times in this post!). But if you do it in any senseful manner, you'd be splitting the board into 2 - One with artists known to do good work, and one still needing to proof themselves.

And then we are back at who judges this. It cannot be any one person, It cannot be the mods alone, and it cannot be the community.

Using a tag or any kind of voting is subject to heavy abuse and only works in an utopian community. Even though we are mostly friendly here, there's probably some troll coming down the line and adding flags to an artist he dislikes. If you think it will work out somehow, YOU ARE WRONG.

And before you think about putting the artists that already have proven themselves as being in some kind of voting committee - good luck getting enough people interested in doing this on a daily basis.

One more point. You guys are talking about Quality control, when we don't even have some kind of way to see top rated pictures of the past 7 days, past 30 days, all time or some kind of average scoring by artist set up on the main page (it's hidden very well and shouldn't be). And while I don't think it would resolve everything, it would at least help some ppl,

Uh, that's exactly what the "Popular" link at the bottom of the post page lets you do. You can also search "order:score" to see all posts in order of score, and you can add more filters to it, such as "order:score sleepymaid" to see all of Sleepymaid's pics in order of score and so forth.