Should flagger names be public?

Somebody's going around flagging posts for "Reason: content." (ex: post #308077, post #427905, post #657245)
As far as I can tell, there's nothing TOS-breaking about any of them. I think this person just has a problem with loli. Maybe flagger's names should be public?

(Edited title to reflect conversation: was "Flagging posts for "content."")

jjj14 said:
Somebody's going around flagging posts for "Reason: content." (ex: post #308077, post #427905, post #657245)
As far as I can tell, there's nothing TOS-breaking about any of them. I think this person just has a problem with loli. Maybe flagger's names should be public?

There's a strong reaction against that so most likely no.

Fencedude has reapproved them.

Flagger names should be visible to Janitor+

Its not something everyone needs to know, but in cases like this, absolutely the staff should.

I keep telling the less people know who flagger is - the better, because of lower chance of potential drama.
Someone probably should be able to control flag use and punish abuse, so admins looks natural choice for me.

We need more than just jxh and albert, both have much better things to be doing with their time.

albert is most likely the only one who can see it from some testing on 3db.

All I wanted to say is if you make it visible - for example for all Janitors+ as Fencedude proposes - then, being mere user you'd have to got balls from steel to flag anything posted by them. And if flagger would be another mod, then... yeah, love & peace. Or maybe not ;)

richie said:
All I wanted to say is if you make it visible - for example for all Janitors+ as Fencedude proposes - then, being mere user you'd have to got balls from steel to flag anything posted by them. And if flagger would be another mod, then... yeah, love & peace. Or maybe not ;)

Oh bullshit. Thats idiotic. If it deserves to be flagged, flag it. The only way people will get in trouble for flagging things is if they do stupid shit like we're discussing in this thread.

Who actually uploaded the image is immaterial, and if someone gets pissy that their image was flagged, and it was deserving of getting flagged, then they probably shouldn't be a contributor.

Oh this is probably Peter Payne.

I'm kind of in a pickle since he pays for ads but also doesn't want loli content on the site.

I know it's really easy for me to say it when I'm not the one paying the bills, but that really isn't his call. We already try to hide obvious loli content with the member level restriction but beyond that, just being an advertiser doesn't give someone control over content.

So I noticed that the flagger's name appears alongside the reason, now. Not that I particularly mind, just thought if it ever was going to implemented, that it would only be viewable by Janitors+ so as to avoid drama and such.

Yeah, I can even see flagger names when I log out, so it's not even restricted to Privileged members... I'm not sure that's wise.

I don't think this will cause any significant drama.

People were worried about drama too when approvers were made visible but AFAIK nothing really happened.

If anything, people will be more careful about what they flag when they see their names displayed on the post page and know that they can be held accountable for what they do.

Fred1515 said:
I don't think this will cause any significant drama.

What a bullshit.
Of course it won't. Because those who are sane won't flag anything anymore.

Here we come, new better danbooru - with 0% of unapprovals! Contributors+, rejoice. Now every shit you post is perfectly safe.

I don't think it's a problem if names are made public, I wouldn't be ashamed of people being able to see it was me who flagged what I flagged

But I think we should redefine what some of the content is. Like "Grotesque". The Wiki says that posts with guro gigantic_breasts and huge_testicles are CANDIDATES for deletion under Danbooru's Terms of Service "grotesque".

But post are being deleted JUST for having gigantic_breasts or JUST for having guro.

Like post #551072

I wasn't here since the beginning, but I imagine that the purpose of warning people about posts with gigantic_breasts, etc about being CANDIDATES for deletion was to reduce the number of Gelbooru quality posts like post #506276 and post #112940. Since art with gigantic_breasts is likely (but not necessarily) to be of this kind

What I'm saying is, having gigantic_breasts, guro, etc is not against the ToS (grotesque) itself.

richie said:
What a bullshit.
Of course it won't. Because those who are sane won't flag anything anymore.

Here we come, new better danbooru - with 0% of unapprovals! Contributors+, rejoice. Now every shit you post is perfectly safe.

Right, because if a Contributor knows you flagged their post, they might... write an angry Dmail! Oh, no!

This will probably cause some butthurt that could have been avoided, but it's not the end of the world. In all likelihood, this is just an experiment, like letting Contribs moderate, and it'll be rolled back in a little while.

Also: forum #31599 (our previous discussion on the matter).

richie said:
What a bullshit.
Of course it won't. Because those who are sane won't flag anything anymore.

No, those who are butthurt won't flag anything anymore because they'll no longer be anonymous and they'll need to have valid reasons to flag stuff. You're obviously not butthurt so you got nothing to worry about.

Roarchu said:
What I'm saying is, having gigantic_breasts, guro, etc is not against the ToS (grotesque) itself.

I'd beg to differ. Violating any point on the ToS is violating the ToS completely. Not everything that violates may end up flagged for deletion (we do bend the rules from time to time), but it should be a sufficient reason for a flag in itself.

Also I'm not really bothered by the fact that flaggers are now public. It was that way in the past, and I don't remember it causing any major problems. My only concern would be if someone properly flags something from a new member, and that new member dmail spams them or something along those lines.

Clueless members bitch a lot in the comments of flagged posts about how flagggers abuse the feature.
I don't care myself but other users might not want to become public targets of these haters (or... they will and the haters will get blocked, can work too). Janitor+ visibility seems wiser to me.

Shinjidude said:
I'd beg to differ. Violating any point on the ToS is violating the ToS completely.

Yes

But "Grotesque" implies gross/repulsive/vomit inducing/etc. While posts with guro, etc have a high chance of falling within the "Grotesque" category, just being guro itself does not make it "Grotesque", and therefore it wouldn't be violating the ToS.

There might be guro posts that are "Grotesque" and are approved, because like you said, the rules are bent sometimes

But can there be a gigantic_breasts post that is NOT "Grotesque"? If it's not "Grotesque" then it's not violating the ToS, should we still delete it just because it has gigantic_breasts in it? That's what I'm saying

Is being guro sufficient reason for flagging? I think it doesn't matter. There will be people who flag a post just because a post contains guro, etc. We can't control that.