Quality Control Policies
So, recent events have driven the administration of the Hub to reconsider our quality control policy and method. Since it sums up our situation well, I'll quote the comment I left on Post #12105, an image that recently had a judgment overturned, for better or worse.
But, here's the problem: Mindwipe and I can't seem to come up with any viable solutions. Everything we have thought of has either been too difficult to set up and maintain (such as a QC Council of sorts) or isn't as fair as the current system.
To expand on the current system's problem: it only takes into account those who like an image when considering which way a judgement may turn. On the flip side, merely allowing negative opinions to be taken into consideration has the problems mentioned in my above quote, which is unacceptable and may be the downfall of the site's community if implemented.
So, we're between a rock and a hard place. Does anyone have any ideas on what sort of system we could put in place for Quality Control that would be fair to both sides of the issue (keeping and removing a pic)?
Vanndril said:
All in all, I never implemented this QC system with any belief that it would work forever. It has inherent flaws. For example, you can't have a static number created off of a base number and have it work, without alterations, no matter how much the base number changes. Changing our QC policies has been a long time coming and has been on my mind since we moved to the hub from the booru when I knew we'd get a huge influx of members. I've been putting it off, because it worked for now. However, as Mindwipe said above, this image serves as an example of our QC system working as planned, but not satisfactorily. With so many saying they think the image is of such low quality, some going so far as to request the nightmare_fuel tag, but with the image also passing our judgment system, a quandary appears: how much support should be required to overturn how much dislike? What is the fairest way to handle this sort of situation?
Personally, the first thing that comes to mind is to have a counterbalance; allow negative opinions of users to deduct points toward passing a judgment. The problem with that sticks out immediately; this works as a recipe toward flaming, arguments, and segregation of the community to two sides: those who tend to defend images and those who tend to offend them. While this would be the "fairest" way to handle QC, it's also the surest way to rip the community apart at the seams from differences of opinion alone. This simply won't do. I mean, most everyone has seen the way that some users have looked upon the administration with disdain in the past after one put images up for judgment. Imagine if users started looking upon and treating other users that way. It would not end well at all.
So, with that said, honestly, what is left? This is the question we have to ask, now. Without that counterbalance, how can we make a fair QC system? We could go back to "the administration decides", but that is hardly fair, and there becomes no way of keeping administration in check. We could create a sort of "QC Council", but there would always be problems about what was allowed to stay and what was not, not even to mention the difficulty of setting one up and maintaining its member base. There is a problem with every solution to the current predicament.
So, our goal becomes to find the least harmful solution - the one with the most pros to the least cons - and to do so within the software's limitations and thus without actually changing the function of the website at its core programming.
All in all, I never implemented this QC system with any belief that it would work forever. It has inherent flaws. For example, you can't have a static number created off of a base number and have it work, without alterations, no matter how much the base number changes. Changing our QC policies has been a long time coming and has been on my mind since we moved to the hub from the booru when I knew we'd get a huge influx of members. I've been putting it off, because it worked for now. However, as Mindwipe said above, this image serves as an example of our QC system working as planned, but not satisfactorily. With so many saying they think the image is of such low quality, some going so far as to request the nightmare_fuel tag, but with the image also passing our judgment system, a quandary appears: how much support should be required to overturn how much dislike? What is the fairest way to handle this sort of situation?
Personally, the first thing that comes to mind is to have a counterbalance; allow negative opinions of users to deduct points toward passing a judgment. The problem with that sticks out immediately; this works as a recipe toward flaming, arguments, and segregation of the community to two sides: those who tend to defend images and those who tend to offend them. While this would be the "fairest" way to handle QC, it's also the surest way to rip the community apart at the seams from differences of opinion alone. This simply won't do. I mean, most everyone has seen the way that some users have looked upon the administration with disdain in the past after one put images up for judgment. Imagine if users started looking upon and treating other users that way. It would not end well at all.
So, with that said, honestly, what is left? This is the question we have to ask, now. Without that counterbalance, how can we make a fair QC system? We could go back to "the administration decides", but that is hardly fair, and there becomes no way of keeping administration in check. We could create a sort of "QC Council", but there would always be problems about what was allowed to stay and what was not, not even to mention the difficulty of setting one up and maintaining its member base. There is a problem with every solution to the current predicament.
So, our goal becomes to find the least harmful solution - the one with the most pros to the least cons - and to do so within the software's limitations and thus without actually changing the function of the website at its core programming.
But, here's the problem: Mindwipe and I can't seem to come up with any viable solutions. Everything we have thought of has either been too difficult to set up and maintain (such as a QC Council of sorts) or isn't as fair as the current system.
To expand on the current system's problem: it only takes into account those who like an image when considering which way a judgement may turn. On the flip side, merely allowing negative opinions to be taken into consideration has the problems mentioned in my above quote, which is unacceptable and may be the downfall of the site's community if implemented.
So, we're between a rock and a hard place. Does anyone have any ideas on what sort of system we could put in place for Quality Control that would be fair to both sides of the issue (keeping and removing a pic)?
