PDA

View Full Version : Community Tagging Overview



Pages : [1] 2

Matt
08-16-2015, 07:01 PM
Hey again, everyone!

Here at Weasyl, one of our core features is community tagging. This is because we’ve chosen to use tagging as a replacement for old-style category systems that limit classification of your work to a predefined range of choices. Our Search (https://www.weasyl.com/help/searching) feature relies entirely on these tags, so comprehensive tagging is essential to making sure that the system is as effective as it can be.

Community tagging has a number of benefits for all different users, whether their focus is creation or consumption. The system is in place to make works more easily discoverable for people knowing what they want to see while not knowing who they might be able to see it from. It’s to increase visibility without leaving the entire effort of tagging solely on artists.

Creators are the best positioned to accurately tag their own work. That’s why we have an optional setting to prevent other users from removing tags you place on your own content. You can find it under Site Preferences in your user settings. Tags placed by a submission’s owner will also appear in a different color: green if you have permission to remove it, and red if you do not. Tags are the only persistent way for your work to be easily found by new viewers after it passes through the front page, so taking a moment to tag thoroughly can really help get your work noticed!

Consumers can more easily find content they’re looking for. Also, if there is content they know to find disturbing or subjects they simply prefer not to see, they can proactively filter that content out. The same tag that can bring a viewer to a submitter’s work specifically can better allow others to tailor their experience on the site to one they’d find most comfortable.

Now, we understand that some of our users take issue with our tagging system in its current form. We also feel that it needs some work to become what we’d like it to be. We are currently looking at various ways to make tagging more robust and appealing. We’ve got a few ideas, but we really want to make sure that we find a solution that’s ideal for both creators and consumers alike. So, if you have any ideas along those lines, we’d love to hear them in the comments!

One thing we do want to make clear is that despite some similarities to how some archive-style sites handle tagging, we do not have a “Tag What You See” policy. We want creators to retain the ability to define the content of their work. We ask that before you tag someone else’s submission, to please read the attached description to ensure that your tag additions accurately reflect the content. If they are removed, please take the hint and do not engage in an “edit war” with the owner. At the same time, we ask that content owners respect the need for our tagging system and to not reflexively revert the addition of accurate tags.

One common concern we hear is the idea that other users could redefine or damage the presentation of one’s work through abusive or deliberately inaccurate tagging. We realize that there is the potential for petty levels of harm from more preoccupied users. However, the same moderation stance we take on comments is applied to tags as well: abuse is not tolerated. Beyond that, purposefully inaccurate tagging is considered a violation as well.

If you’re having issues with abusive tagging, please report it to our staff. You can file a ticket by reporting your own submission (feels weird, we know), selecting “Perpetual incorrect tagging” as the reason, and pointing out the harmful tags and taggers in the comment field. Repeat offenders can have their tagging privileges removed.

This system is still in progress to its best state. If anyone has any suggestions please let us know in the comments. Also, we do understand if some people feel this system is not for them. However, the reason that community tagging is such a core feature to Weasyl is that our Search feature is entirely dependent on it. Tags are how your art gets found, and community taggers are helping your art to be found.

Thank you for taking the time to read this through. We look forward to hearing from you in the thread. We would also love to hear from people interested in joining our development team. If you’re at all interested, please let us know by contacting us here (https://forums.weasyl.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?7514-Help-Weasyl-as-a-developer!)!

http://i.imgur.com/WP2tOEH.png

Art by Uluri (https://www.weasyl.com/~uluri)

Eskiworks
08-16-2015, 07:43 PM
Let me preface this by saying I have experienced very little tag abuse so far, and am currently content enough with the tagging system. I understand why it exists, and enjoy the thoroughness the tagging system offers when searching. I think there's definitely room for improvement, so thank you for being open to suggestions!

You touch on something that I think is at the heart of artists' concerns; creators retaining control of their work. The best suggestions will surround addressing this concern. Perhaps users should be allowed to opt out of community tagging, or tags have to go through an approval stage before being added. It's nice that we have the option to prevent others from removing our tags, but it doesn't feel like that's enough control when it comes to tagging. It still leaves us open to abuse, and takes preventative action out of our hands entirely. I personally would rather have the ability to approve or decline outside tags, instead of letting them be visible on my submission until I have the time to police my gallery's tags.

These would be nice perks to have in the tagging system. Otherwise, keep up the great work!

Swanda
08-16-2015, 08:33 PM
- The system could really use some associated words feature; right now it doesn't even include both singular and plural of the same word for once. ("Cat" and "Cats" will give you completely different results)

-As Eski mentions, a way for artists to approve tags before they are added.
And of course an option to turn off "tag approval"

- Hidden tags would also be a huuuge help in addition to that.
They would be tags that wouldn't display on the submission for anyone but staff and the creator.
These tags would be ignored by the search but would get picked up by the blocking filter.
Tags not yet approved or discarded by the artist would be seen as hidden tags by the site.
So if the tag is added by someone who is blocking it, the submission would disappear from their view instantly, while it wouldn't show up in searches, or appear on the submission to viewers.

- Tags should be separated differently, no really get rid of the _ and allow me to copy paste a full sting please?
Doing the:
This is a tag, this is a different tag, three tag here,
Appears to be pretty universal and make people less frustrated.

- An “tags often used by you” list while submitting that you could just point and click to add the tag
To speed things up a bit.

BlueJaySF
08-16-2015, 08:42 PM
The option to block community tagging is sorely needed. I'm the only person I want tagging anything of mine.

Kimura
08-16-2015, 08:59 PM
Hey, here are some random ideas:

Create an interface for community taggers to easily tag a lot of works. Show them random artwork, allow them to tag it, maybe with suggestions based on already existing tags. Add a next button to go to the next random artwork.

Auto-complete tags based on overall popularity (so you have less typos). Also you could add suggestions based on the description or other tags that are used on the image. Or suggest tags based on the previous works of the content creator or anyone mentioned in the description. So if I'm mentioned in the description, it'll suggest "snow leopard", because at lot of my artwork is tagged with that.

Like Eskiworks said, add an optional approval system for the content creators.

Add a number wang somewhere to the profile, add a point for an approved (and popular) tag, subtract 3 (or more) points for declined tags.

Maybe don't show tags publicly until at least 2 people added (or confirmed) it to content to prevent abuse.

Noxid
08-16-2015, 10:23 PM
the most important part of the tag system to me is the ability to create a blacklist. There's some things out there that I just really would be happier not having to see on a daily basis. Being able to add my own tag to an image is an easy way right now for me to "fix" something that isn't tagged correctly without having to deal with the artist directly. So, I think this use case is something that should also be considered going forward.

and yeah the other big issue with the tag system as it is now is that there are way too many aliases for the same "thing", like [cat] [cats] [feline] [kitty] [housecat], it goes on and on.

zenia
08-16-2015, 10:45 PM
While I appreciate it when someone thinks of a tag that I may not have (I do tag all of my work) I would like it if when someone wants to add a tag, it sends me a notification so that I can approve or reject said tag. I find it invasive to just automatically add tags without my (the creators) permission. Sure, I could remove it afterward... but I would prefer the choice to say 'yes' or 'no' beforehand.

I mentioned this on a serial-taggers page several weeks ago. I had this problem on another website where people kept trying to tag one of my images as cub-porn... which it was absolutely not. I got at least 6 or 7 related tag suggestions and thankfully I was able to reject them all.

Irbisgreif
08-16-2015, 11:04 PM
If we're going to have useful tags, we need the community and consistent tagging standards. This means that we're going to have to go for a 'tag what you see' approach with standardized tags. This is just one of those things where a site can't give the artists 'whatever they want'. If we do that, we're just going to have tags become a useless mess as each artist will use their own opinion (rather than a community developed standard) to tag their work.

As for some of the cases people have brought up, such as trans* work being tagged with 'futa', that could be solved with aliases. Simply replace 'futa' or 'herm' or such with a reasonable aliased name, and when someone searches for an aliased tag, bring up all of the aliases.

Webster
08-16-2015, 11:41 PM
I didn't even realize we didn't get asked for approval (unlike e.g. InkBunny). If that's actually the case then I'd say that's personally the biggest thing I'd like to see. The tags can even apply until you choose, but I definitely want to know when someone has changed a tag. Unless I get a notice I have no reason to go back to previous pieces to see if they've been changed.

I disagree with Irbisgreif about requiring a "tag what you see" approach, but agree that standardized tags would be good. My suggested implementation would be that if an artist adds a tag that's not the "main representation" tag, it applies the main tag, too (e.g. cat -> feline), or at least suggests it. However, even if it doesn't add, just having search automatically handle it would be good, although perhaps not as efficient (computer resources wise) as just replacing the tag with its main (root) tag.

I would suggest, if you do make an ontology/word-relation system to do that, that there would be a way to view relations, both in general and as new ones are added, so people can check them out and suggest additional relations, alternatives, or arguments against relations (e.g. someone says 'tiger' is just 'feline', but 'tiger' is a subset of it, so you shouldn't be replacing tiger, only adding feline to it.)

weykent
08-17-2015, 03:20 AM
Let me preface this by saying I have experienced very little tag abuse so far, and am currently content enough with the tagging system. I understand why it exists, and enjoy the thoroughness the tagging system offers when searching. I think there's definitely room for improvement, so thank you for being open to suggestions!

You touch on something that I think is at the heart of artists' concerns; creators retaining control of their work. The best suggestions will surround addressing this concern. Perhaps users should be allowed to opt out of community tagging, or tags have to go through an approval stage before being added. It's nice that we have the option to prevent others from removing our tags, but it doesn't feel like that's enough control when it comes to tagging. It still leaves us open to abuse, and takes preventative action out of our hands entirely. I personally would rather have the ability to approve or decline outside tags, instead of letting them be visible on my submission until I have the time to police my gallery's tags.

Just trying to understand your motivation here: while having suffered no abuse yourself, you're concerned about the potential for abuse? What kind of abuse are you anticipating that could be solved by having to approve all tag edits?


- Hidden tags would also be a huuuge help in addition to that.
They would be tags that wouldn't display on the submission for anyone but staff and the creator.
These tags would be ignored by the search but would get picked up by the blocking filter.
Tags not yet approved or discarded by the artist would be seen as hidden tags by the site.
So if the tag is added by someone who is blocking it, the submission would disappear from their view instantly, while it wouldn't show up in searches, or appear on the submission to viewers.


Maybe don't show tags publicly until at least 2 people added (or confirmed) it to content to prevent abuse.

This has come up several times in the past, but I still think it's a bad idea. We already get a lot of support requests saying basically "why can I see my post but my friend can't?" when the issue is the choice of maximum content rating. If submissions were silently filtered out without any user-visible explanation, that's horrible UX.


The option to block community tagging is sorely needed. I'm the only person I want tagging anything of mine.

Can you explain why that is? I did just check, and it doesn't look like any submission of yours has gotten any tags added by anyone other than yourself.


Create an interface for community taggers to easily tag a lot of works. Show them random artwork, allow them to tag it, maybe with suggestions based on already existing tags. Add a next button to go to the next random artwork.

This is a great idea. Previously some people in dev had thrown around the idea of doing something like google's image categorization game, where two users are paired up and try to come up with new tags to add to an image that aren't in any of the existing tags. The trick is that they have to come up with the same descriptive words or phrases.


Auto-complete tags based on overall popularity (so you have less typos). Also you could add suggestions based on the description or other tags that are used on the image. Or suggest tags based on the previous works of the content creator or anyone mentioned in the description. So if I'm mentioned in the description, it'll suggest "snow leopard", because at lot of my artwork is tagged with that.

Also good. I think dev has a proof-of-concept of this somewhere that never got polished to satisfaction.


I didn't even realize we didn't get asked for approval (unlike e.g. InkBunny). If that's actually the case then I'd say that's personally the biggest thing I'd like to see. The tags can even apply until you choose, but I definitely want to know when someone has changed a tag. Unless I get a notice I have no reason to go back to previous pieces to see if they've been changed.

You do get a notification on tag changes for a submission, but there's just no prompt of whether or not you want to approve it.

Eskiworks
08-17-2015, 03:38 AM
Just trying to understand your motivation here: while having suffered no abuse yourself, you're concerned about the potential for abuse? What kind of abuse are you anticipating that could be solved by having to approve all tag edits?

My only motivation is to provide the feedback asked for here. The sort of abuse I have suffered so far (I said very little, not none), is receiving inappropriate tags for a submission, and letting that be attached to the submission until I have time/internet access to remove the tag. Experiencing a low volume of abusive tags doesn't preclude me from suggesting solutions, I hope. With the proposed solution of an approval/denial system before an outside tag is added to a submission, we can avoid abuse before it can be committed in the first place, and put the control back in the hands of the artists! Win/win if you ask me. Less work for mods, and more control for artists!

Bornes
08-17-2015, 03:46 AM
If we're going to have useful tags, we need the community and consistent tagging standards. This means that we're going to have to go for a 'tag what you see' approach with standardized tags. This is just one of those things where a site can't give the artists 'whatever they want'. If we do that, we're just going to have tags become a useless mess as each artist will use their own opinion (rather than a community developed standard) to tag their work.

As for some of the cases people have brought up, such as trans* work being tagged with 'futa', that could be solved with aliases. Simply replace 'futa' or 'herm' or such with a reasonable aliased name, and when someone searches for an aliased tag, bring up all of the aliases.

Personally, I agree with everything said here. I know a lot of artists aren't going to like it, but I think this would be best for the site and community as a whole.

I also REALLY LIKE What Kimura suggested, where we get random artwork and get to tag them. I could spend hours doing that out of boredom. It would help the community as a whole and be seen as a way to pass time on the site.

weykent
08-17-2015, 04:13 AM
My only motivation is to provide the feedback asked for here. The sort of abuse I have suffered so far (I said very little, not none), is receiving inappropriate tags for a submission, and letting that be attached to the submission until I have time/internet access to remove the tag. Experiencing a low volume of abusive tags doesn't preclude me from suggesting solutions, I hope.

No, definitely not trying to imply you can't provide feedback if you haven't suffered abuse. For the sake of discussion, could you elaborate more on what tags you felt were abusive, and why?


With the proposed solution of an approval/denial system before an outside tag is added to a submission, we can avoid abuse before it can be committed in the first place, and put the control back in the hands of the artists! Win/win if you ask me. Less work for mods, and more control for artists!

Sure, but artists and mods aren't the only users of the site. See Noxid's post (https://forums.weasyl.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?7738-Community-Tagging-Overview&p=89121&viewfull=1#post89121); the ability to blacklist tags is important for people browsing the site as well, and is ineffective if there's no way for the greater community to add tags.

blufawx
08-17-2015, 04:28 AM
I barely use weasyl anymore. Heck, I use inkbunny more now than I use Weasyl. Why? Because of the tags. The annoying "_" to seperate words and the allowing other users to tag my works are the most prevelant to this thread (though forcing me to use .txt or .PDF comes to mind)

There needs to be an opt in for artists, writers, and people posting commissions for allowing people to tag your work. If the "allow others to tag" isn't checked then they aren't allowed to tag.

We need standard tags too

Eskiworks
08-17-2015, 04:30 AM
No, definitely not trying to imply you can't provide feedback if you haven't suffered abuse. For the sake of discussion, could you elaborate more on what tags you felt were abusive, and why?

I honestly can't remember, like I said it's very little! That's why I prefaced my original comment by saying I'm overall pretty happy with the way the tagging system works. Delving into specifics of what little I have personally experienced isn't particularly relevant to my suggestions.



Sure, but artists and mods aren't the only users of the site. See Noxid's post (https://forums.weasyl.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?7738-Community-Tagging-Overview&p=89121&viewfull=1#post89121); the ability to blacklist tags is important for people browsing the site as well, and is ineffective if there's no way for the greater community to add tags.

I can see that, sure! I guess my priority as a creator is control of my content, and a lot of other folks seem to have that priority as well. By allowing tags to come through and only policing them when they are abusive (irrelevant, offense, trolling, etc), it takes a little more control out of our hands. It tips the balance away from us slightly, which I can tell by some of the other comments makes some creators uncomfortable. It does require you to trust creators to tag their work appropriately, of course, rather than the community at large. Which we can do! I saw someone suggest more unified tagging guidelines, that would be a good addition to the approve/deny system for outside tags. That way perhaps you can trust us creators a little more, knowing there's some better guidelines for tags, and we can retain control of how our work is tagged.

DragonFlayer
08-17-2015, 04:47 AM
Community Tagging is just a mess, before long this place could just become another e261
People just tag whatever they believe they see and disregard completely what the author of the piece intends to convey

If Community Tagging is going to stay, at least make an Opt-Out option so people who don't want their stuff tagged by random people can keep their content only with their own tags

So anyone who actually wants community tagging on their content can get it and anyone who wants their stuff left alone and not resort to blocking people who probably didn't mean harm when they tried tagging their content

A good example of why community tagging sucks:
A friend artist of mine stopped using Weasyl because he uploaded a piece with a rather flat chested and masculine female in a bathing suit, it was a clean piece and she had tagged the artwork with 'female', an Admin/Mod came and just blatantly edited the tags for 'male', just because he thought the character was male. The result? My artist friend found himself soft quitting Weasyl, he didn't delete his account, but he sure as hell won't be active anymore, it's bad enough that users get on to tag stuff however they want, but when Mods/Admins do it in such a forceful way, it's really discouraging

It happened to me as well, over my tags not using "_" for multiple words, sorry, but I'm never, never, never going to tag my stuff like that, it's just disgusting

weykent
08-17-2015, 05:08 AM
I can see that, sure! I guess my priority as a creator is control of my content, and a lot of other folks seem to have that priority as well. By allowing tags to come through and only policing them when they are abusive (irrelevant, offense, trolling, etc), it takes a little more control out of our hands. It tips the balance away from us slightly, which I can tell by some of the other comments makes some creators uncomfortable. It does require you to trust creators to tag their work appropriately, of course, rather than the community at large. Which we can do! I saw someone suggest more unified tagging guidelines, that would be a good addition to the approve/deny system for outside tags. That way perhaps you can trust us creators a little more, knowing there's some better guidelines for tags, and we can retain control of how our work is tagged.

Sure, I'm all for having unified tagging guidelines. I've been pushing it internally for a while, but nothing has coalesced there yet.

One thing I've seen semi-recently on weasyl, though, is an artist who deletes all user-submitted tags, posted a journal saying "please don't tag my submissions", and never adds more than two tags (the absolute minimum) to a submission. What recourse does the community have in a situation like that?

- - - Updated - - -


There needs to be an opt in for artists, writers, and people posting commissions for allowing people to tag your work. If the "allow others to tag" isn't checked then they aren't allowed to tag.

Can you please explain why this should be the case?

Eskiworks
08-17-2015, 05:21 AM
Sure, I'm all for having unified tagging guidelines. I've been pushing it internally for a while, but nothing has coalesced there yet.

One thing I've seen semi-recently on weasyl, though, is an artist who deletes all user-submitted tags, posted a journal saying "please don't tag my submissions", and never adds more than two tags (the absolute minimum) to a submission. What recourse does the community have in a situation like that?

While that's far from ideal in a system in which tags get your art found, it's my opinion that it should be the creator's choice how to tag their work, not the community's. You of course want the site to be friendly to people browsing, but making it friendly for those adding the content being browsed ought to take priority.

DragonFlayer
08-17-2015, 05:27 AM
While that's far from ideal in a system in which tags get your art found, it's my opinion that it should be the creator's choice how to tag their work, not the community's. You of course want the site to be friendly to people browsing, but making it friendly for those adding the content being browsed ought to take priority.

I agree with this, What's the point of a site about CONTENT in which the Content Creators just leave because the service doesn't care about what they want, if the priority is on the users just wanting to consume content 'efficiently' by taking away part of the tools from the hands of the content creators, you will just see a nice stream of these content makers leaving

weykent
08-17-2015, 05:29 AM
While that's far from ideal in a system in which tags get your art found, it's my opinion that it should be the creator's choice how to tag their work, not the community's. You of course want the site to be friendly to people browsing, but making it friendly for those adding the content being browsed ought to take priority.

Remember that tags are for filtering out as well as for finding submissions. Just to confirm: you think that, if a submitter doesn't want to allow more than two tags, that nobody should be able to filter out those submissions without having to filter out everything posted by that submitter?

Eskiworks
08-17-2015, 05:36 AM
Remember that tags are for filtering out as well as for finding submissions. Just to confirm: you think that, if a submitter doesn't want to allow more than two tags, that nobody should be able to filter out those submissions without having to filter out everything posted by that submitter?

No, I simply believe that content creators ought to retain control over the tags in their work. Please do not put words in my mouth.

weykent
08-17-2015, 05:37 AM
No, I simply believe that content creators ought to retain control over the tags in their work. Please do not put words in my mouth.

Apologies; I'm not trying to put words in anybody's mouth. The question I asked was not specifically answered, so I tried to infer an answer from what you've said. Could you please explain, then, what other recourse the community should have in such a situation?

Eskiworks
08-17-2015, 05:43 AM
Apologies; I'm not trying to put words in anybody's mouth. The question I asked was not specifically answered, so I tried to infer an answer from what you've said. Could you please explain, then, what other recourse the community should have in such a situation?

I'm sorry, I answered your question to the best of my abilities. If it doesn't make sense I'm not sure how to clarify further.

weykent
08-17-2015, 05:46 AM
I'm sorry, I answered your question to the best of my abilities. If it doesn't make sense I'm not sure how to clarify further.

If a user very strongly does not want to view, say, nonconsensual situations depicted in art, a submitter posts more than a few submissions which do depict such situations which are not tagged as such, and the submitter refuses to add a tag to indicate that, what should a user be able to do other than block all submissions by that submitter?

DragonFlayer
08-17-2015, 05:48 AM
Apologies; I'm not trying to put words in anybody's mouth. The question I asked was not specifically answered, so I tried to infer an answer from what you've said. Could you please explain, then, what other recourse the community should have in such a situation?

Blacklisting by tags? It doesn't work, not even with the community tags, the community is always going to tag what they want to see, people is going to start fighting about "Intesex" this "Futa" that "Herm" this, it's just going to be the same kind of disrespectful pandemonium that is e261, sure, artists can just roll back these mindless taggers, but even they will get fed up with this

So here's my neat blacklisting system, running on tags, I'm trying to block something very specific, but hey look, someone removed the tag about that very specific thing I didn't want to see on some piece because one community tagger feels that thing I didn't want to see doesn't belong to a piece that actually does contain that which I didn't want to see

Just stick with ratings, don't want to see weird stuff? ignore weird stuff, it's the internet, even Google sucks at hiding that which you don't want to see

Eskiworks
08-17-2015, 06:01 AM
If a user very strongly does not want to view, say, nonconsensual situations depicted in art, a submitter posts more than a few submissions which do depict such situations which are not tagged as such, and the submitter refuses to add a tag to indicate that, what should a user be able to do other than block all submissions by that submitter?

Again, it's not ideal, but yes. That is precisely what we do on other sites when content creators make things we don't want to see. It does sorta suck, but I still feel it's more important that content creators retain control of their work.

I really do understand why you want to keep the public tagging system in place, it's a cool idea! And as is, it's not horrible by any stretch of the imagination of course. However, I still think creators deserve control over their content, and the best way with the current system is by adding an accept/deny system. Especially since right now there's nothing stopping artists from simply removing all outside tags to circumvent the community tagging system entirely.

I'm not going to leave the site if you folks chose not to implement an accept/deny system, but I have also said about all I have to say to support my suggestion. Looking forward to reading further feedback, and continuing my use of this site!

Qualzar
08-17-2015, 06:23 AM
I see that some people are leaning towards "Tag what you see", but that method comes with its own set of problems. Seriously, what is the harm with "tag what you know"? "Tag what you know" not only answers questions created by things that aren't seen (such as confirming whether or not a character facing away is male or female) but it accurately categorizes characters based on what they are, and not what is seen. I've been in situations where my characters are tagged wildly incorrectly just because someone has an...interest... for whatever they tag them as, and because something like the character's chest isn't shown, people get into a fit and claim I have no right as a creator to define my own content.

I can't even begin to tell you how many times I've been left wondering if a character is simply male or female because "ambiguous gender/sex" replaces what the artist and owner of the character knows. Just let artists keep their own tags because they know what content is there behind the scenes. What's the worst that could happen? You search for "female" but the character is facing away, and since you can't see any defining features, you're suddenly upset?

Art shouldn't be limited to just the content. There are artists, owners and creators behind what we post. Treating the content as if it's just there for our viewing pleasure, and not sharing our creations and characters to discuss and talk about is just plain silly. It almost reminds me of people who repost art without credit saying "I don't see what's wrong with sharing ^-^", guess what, you're cutting out part of the art when you disconnect character owners and artists from their creation. I noticed that some people say that the submissions description can allow a tag to be considered "correct" if the character, in the submission's description, is described as intersex, a certain species, or whatever. Why is the description considered a pre-requisite for earning the right to define what we make? I could just copy and paste my tags into the description every time I post something if that's the case.

DragonFlayer
08-17-2015, 06:28 AM
I see that some people are leaning towards "Tag what you see", but that method comes with its own set of problems. Seriously, what is the harm with "tag what you know"? "Tag what you know" not only answers questions created by things that aren't seen (such as confirming whether or not a character facing away is male or female) but it accurately categorizes characters based on what they are, and not what is seen. I've been in situations where my characters are tagged wildly incorrectly just because someone has an...interest... for whatever they tag them as, and because something like the character's chest isn't shown, people get into a fit and claim I have no right as a creator to define my own content.

I can't even begin to tell you how many times I've been left wondering if a character is simply male or female because "ambiguous gender/sex" replaces what the artist and owner of the character knows. Just let artists keep their own tags because they know what content is there behind the scenes. What's the worst that could happen? You search for "female" but the character is facing away, and since you can't see any defining features, you're suddenly upset?

Art shouldn't be limited to just the content. There are artists, owners and creators behind what we post. Treating the content as if it's just there for our viewing pleasure, and not sharing our creations and characters to discuss and talk about is just plain silly. It almost reminds me of people who repost art without credit saying "I don't see what's wrong with sharing ^-^", guess what, you're cutting out part of the art when you disconnect character owners and artists from their creation. I noticed that some people say that the submissions description can allow a tag to be considered "correct" if the character, in the submission's description, is described as intersex, a certain species, or whatever. Why is the description considered a pre-requisite for earning the right to define what we make? I could just copy and paste my tags into the description every time I post something if that's the case.

This, exactly this, this is the whole thing, couldn't have said it better myself

Fiz
08-17-2015, 06:50 AM
"Tag what you know" is something we would rather people be doing rather than "tag what you see". A unicorn with it's horn obscured in an image doesn't mean it's not a unicorn, etc.

I think our biggest issue with trying to implement an approval system is what happens to tag change requests that go to accounts that are no longer active? Without other checks in place, those tag edits would just stay in limbo forever and the submissions would still (possibly) be inaccurately tagged so people wouldn't be able to find or block it properly.

There'd have to be a part of that system that would still make it work in those sort of circumstances. The idea I just thought of was that after a certain amount of time (lets say for example, 72 hours), if those tag edit requests are neither accepted or denied, the tags still go into effect but possibly under a different category from 'community tags' on the submission, just to show that it is a community tag but it isn't approved yet.

Kurk2288
08-17-2015, 06:51 AM
I'm in the same boat as Noxid,
When I had a decent sized black-list, I was still seeing content I didn't want to come across. Even when using multiple tags for the same subject. Some of the artists I've PMed about tagging were- let's just say upset? Which I don't understand, when some of the tags I've suggested were completely harmless or inoffensive (blacklisting was also never mentioned). It also puzzles me when tags are indeed relevant or appropriate, and it's an issue for some personal reason?

For example,
Some one submits My Little Pony fan art, and the only tags are horse, equine and pony.
I then add the "MLP" & "My little pony" tags to it, OR ask them to tag their future content with it. However they take issue with it for some reason...

What's more annoying is when someone suggests you black-list content you don't actually mind viewing, or tags that are broad and ambiguous. Eventually I gave up on tagging, turned my content ratings down to moderate, stopped browsing and stuck with searches.

Just to be clear,
I'm a non-fur, not familiar with the whole "futa" vs "trans" drama and also have no problem coming across content I'm not looking for. The black-list is just a nice feature to help filter out things I'm not interested in.

Lets also not pretend as if every one who submits content are perfect little angels because I've had my fair share of reporting. Honestly, Why not a trust based system? Give taggers the option to earn a trusted status for having a record of tagging things appropriately, reporting and deleting bad tags. Give Artists the option to disable tags from general users, but trusted taggers can still provide input. (I'm on the fence about artists having complete control over tags)

DragonFlayer
08-17-2015, 06:53 AM
"Tag what you know" is something we would rather people be doing rather than "tag what you see". A unicorn with it's horn obscured in an image doesn't mean it's not a unicorn, etc.

I think our biggest issue with trying to implement an approval system is what happens to tag change requests that go to accounts that are no longer active? Without other checks in place, those tag edits would just stay in limbo forever and the submissions would still (possibly) be inaccurately tagged so people wouldn't be able to find or block it properly.

There'd have to be a part of that system that would still make it work in those sort of circumstances. The idea I just thought of was that after a certain amount of time (lets say for example, 72 hours), if those tag edit requests are neither accepted or denied, the tags still go into effect but possibly under a different category from 'community tags' on the submission, just to show that it is a community tag but it isn't approved yet.

That sounds alright, but still, what if the (active in this case) artist doesn't want a certain tag in their work? what if the tag is accurate, but the artist really dislikes the tag? What if the tag is hurtful, offensive, distasteful or anything else for the artist? And yet it is an accurate and valid tag, what then?

Jupiter Jyohti
08-17-2015, 07:35 AM
I really like the tagging system; the intent of it as a search feature is very cool. However, I no longer add community tags to any works because nearly every single artist whose work I have tagged has complained about it, threatened to leave the site over the system, or has personally asked me not to do so, and most of those tags get removed, even as I tried to become more restrictive and selective about the tags I added. Even synonyms, pluralizations, or corrected spellings of existing tags are removed and sometimes trigger the artist to request no further tagging.

In a perfect world, this system would probably be ideal, but it's frustrating to me in its current implementation because I, apparently, cannot reasonably use it, as its very existence in turn frustrates most artists. While I got the impression the lack of an opt-out to community tagging was an effort to encourage adoption of the community tagging system, all I've encountered while attempting to use it are frustrated artists who would rather have complete control over the tags on their work.

Furthermore, you can see very divisive opinions even within this thread over the difference between 'tag-what-you-see' (which is an appropriate and powerful strategy for getting images to the widest available appropriate audience, but will not always be accurate to artist intent) and 'tag-what-you-know' (which is generally considered more respectful to the artist, but is often completely useless as an image searching/sorting/blocking tool, as the artist will likely already have provided as much description as they intend to the artist tags). While I, as an artist, don't mind people reinterpreting my works however they wish, because that's a thing that happens to art (and in this case, crass porn), I do understand the desire many artists have to retain control over the presentation of their work. For many artists, for this to feel like a curated gallery of their work, they feel they should have absolute control over the tags, even if, in some cases, this makes their images virtually invisible to the search tool.

I've puzzled over these problems several times now. Either I lack the insight or intelligence to provide the perfect compromise, or maybe it doesn't exist. It honestly feels like having broad standardized category tags like DeviantArt or FurAffinity (or, indeed, many imageboards) do would at least make search tools on the site more functional, given that as it stands many artists do not take the time to do much with the tagging system and apparently want as little as possible to do with it, often leaving images with NO functionally-searchable tags relevant to their content. Additionally, an opt-out system may be preferable, although my opinion is still divided there; if an artist is determined to remove all the tags added to their work, or will otherwise leave the site, then the only way to satisfy that subset of users is to allow an opt-out of the community tagging system. However, that does once again leave the issue of rendering vestigial a useful content sorting system that otherwise seems to be seeing a fair bit of resistance but which could be wonderful if widely adopted.

For my own part, I don't mind the community tagging system. I personally quite like it, haven't had any problems yet with abuse, and I don't feel the need to aggressively police my image tags. I, for whatever strange personal reason, would like people to see the dumb crap I doodle, and unless a piece is commissioned work of someone else's personal character, I don't think it would be possible to much bother me with bad tags the way some other artists have been ruffled. Perhaps each image could be opted out of the community tagging system upon upload? That's a feature I might legitimately use to distinguish between work of other folks' personal characters, where I could see them taking offense at poorly-moderated image tags, and my own personal work, where I'm not really likely to care about inaccuracies so much and would be happy leaving them open to community tagging.

In the meantime, however, I have been aggressively encouraged away from tagging the uploads of others, and the bizarre cultural nuances of the entire situation give me a headache, so it is not a system I feel I CAN reasonably use.

DragonFlayer
08-17-2015, 07:45 AM
How about this, Add an opt-out setting, if you opt-out from community tagging, the piece won't be searchable, I would prefer people be unable to search my stuff entirely if it means they won't touch my tags

So no oversensitive searchers need to get eye bleach and no artists flip out over people tagging their stuff with whatever. Sounds like a pretty good compromise

It takes a big chunk of entitlement to feel one holds power over the content created by someone else, specially when such content is not intended nor directed for you in any way

Fiz
08-17-2015, 08:01 AM
That sounds alright, but still, what if the (active in this case) artist doesn't want a certain tag in their work? what if the tag is accurate, but the artist really dislikes the tag? What if the tag is hurtful, offensive, distasteful or anything else for the artist? And yet it is an accurate and valid tag, what then?

I'll be honest and say I don't know because I really cannot think of an example of this actually happening.

The only sort of example I could think of is people not wanting tags like herm on their art. But that goes in line with 'tag what you know' as well. If the submission of said character, which may seem like it would be tagged a "herm", but the artist says it is not a herm, then that tag wouldn't be accurate since it is now knowledge that the character is not a herm.

That said for general "offensive" terms, another idea I had thought of was having a sort of 'semi-banned' tag list. As in, Weasyl has a set of tags that may be considered offensive to others that only the submitter can add as a tag. These tags would not be allowed to be added by the community.

A side idea I had of this was having users have the ability to pre-emptively disallow certain tags, in the chance that said example I mentioned came up, but we would have to figure out the details of a system like this to keep it from being abused in such a way that users would just dump massive tag lists in to basically block all community tagging that way, rather than pre-emptively blocking certain tags on certain submissions that they know for certain they don't want.

- - - Updated - - -


How about this, Add an opt-out setting, if you opt-out from community tagging, the piece won't be searchable, I would prefer people be unable to search my stuff entirely if it means they won't touch my tags

So no oversensitive searchers need to get eye bleach and no artists flip out over people tagging their stuff with whatever. Sounds like a pretty good compromise

It takes a big chunk of entitlement to feel one holds power over the content created by someone else, specially when such content is not intended nor directed for you in any way

I think this idea was tossed around in our staff channels before but personally, I have no problem with such an implementation.

Don't want the community to add tags to a piece? Fine, but that means that said piece cannot be found via search or browsing, so that the issue with someone unable to blacklist said piece doesn't come up because said piece isn't even going to appear during search.

DragonFlayer
08-17-2015, 08:22 AM
I'll be honest and say I don't know because I really cannot think of an example of this actually happening.

The only sort of example I could think of is people not wanting tags like herm on their art. But that goes in line with 'tag what you know' as well. If the submission of said character, which may seem like it would be tagged a "herm", but the artist says it is not a herm, then that tag wouldn't be accurate since it is now knowledge that the character is not a herm.

That said for general "offensive" terms, another idea I had thought of was having a sort of 'semi-banned' tag list. As in, Weasyl has a set of tags that may be considered offensive to others that only the submitter can add as a tag. These tags would not be allowed to be added by the community.

A side idea I had of this was having users have the ability to pre-emptively disallow certain tags, in the chance that said example I mentioned came up, but we would have to figure out the details of a system like this to keep it from being abused in such a way that users would just dump massive tag lists in to basically block all community tagging that way, rather than pre-emptively blocking certain tags on certain submissions that they know for certain they don't want.

- - - Updated - - -



I think this idea was tossed around in our staff channels before but personally, I have no problem with such an implementation.

Don't want the community to add tags to a piece? Fine, but that means that said piece cannot be found via search or browsing, so that the issue with someone unable to blacklist said piece doesn't come up because said piece isn't even going to appear during search.

The Opt-out setting as defined above would be the best, perhaps on a per-submission implementation rather than gallery-wide, perhaps people who don't care could even get a setting to show everything in browsing/searching, even submissions with disabled community tags

Looking at submissions with community tags disabled would require direct browsing or linking of that artist's gallery/submission, if you are using the blacklist system, if you aren't using the blacklist system, everything shows up in searches/browsing, community tags enabled or not, how does that sound?

Fiz
08-17-2015, 08:41 AM
The Opt-out setting as defined above would be the best, perhaps on a per-submission implementation rather than gallery-wide, perhaps people who don't care could even get a setting to show everything in browsing/searching, even submissions with disabled community tags

Looking at submissions with community tags disabled would require direct browsing or linking of that artist's gallery/submission, if you are using the blacklist system, if you aren't using the blacklist system, everything shows up in searches/browsing, community tags enabled or not, how does that sound?

Not a particular fan of the separate option because, if I'm reading your post correctly, those submissions would still end up getting in the way of other peoples blacklisting, just because the submitter doesn't personally use the blacklist system (which a lot of people don't seem to know exists, so this would be a major problem). If I'm reading wrong though, please correct me.

That said if it was an opt-out I'd much rather it be opt-out per submission.

I'd also like there to be away to blacklist via username without having to use the ignore/block system to do so, so if you know someone draws things you never want to see, or you know they're a poor tagger, then you can just blacklist entirely like that.

DragonFlayer
08-17-2015, 08:56 AM
Not a particular fan of the separate option because, if I'm reading your post correctly, those submissions would still end up getting in the way of other peoples blacklisting, just because the submitter doesn't personally use the blacklist system (which a lot of people don't seem to know exists, so this would be a major problem). If I'm reading wrong though, please correct me.

That said if it was an opt-out I'd much rather it be opt-out per submission.

I'd also like there to be away to blacklist via username without having to use the ignore/block system to do so, so if you know someone draws things you never want to see, or you know they're a poor tagger, then you can just blacklist entirely like that.

username blacklisting sounds good

Let me clarify what I said

Submitter Opts-Out of Community Tagging

User using Blacklist won't see Submitter's opted-out submission in Browsing/Searching, only direct linking would allow a blacklisted work to be seen by the user.

User not using Blacklist will see everything in Browsing/Searching, even submissions with Community Tagging disabled by Submitter.

Idea for Direct Linking of Blacklisted Submissions:
User gets a Warning Prompt telling them why the submission is in their blacklist, be it tags or username, before redirecting straight into submission after they consent to press an 'agree/accept/ok' button.

Alternate Idea for Hiding Blacklisted Content:
The content still shows up in Browsing/Searching but shows a 'WARNING' Thumbnail displaying the matching blacklist tag/username instead of the submission's original thumbnail.

Noxid
08-17-2015, 10:15 AM
- Tags should be separated differently, no really get rid of the _ and allow me to copy paste a full sting please?
Doing the:
This is a tag, this is a different tag, three tag here,
Appears to be pretty universal and make people less frustrated.

Regarding this, I actually can't think of any site that lets you tag this way?
FA separates by spaces
DA and Tumblr use twitter-style hashtags (they either use underscores or mash both words together, depending on whatever someone feels like doing)
e621 uses underscores and I'm *pretty* sure soFurry and inkbunny follow suit

DragonFlayer
08-17-2015, 10:26 AM
Regarding this, I actually can't think of any site that lets you tag this way?
FA separates by spaces
DA and Tumblr use twitter-style hashtags (they either use underscores or mash both words together, depending on whatever someone feels like doing)
e621 uses underscores and I'm *pretty* sure soFurry and inkbunny follow suit

Nope, in SoFurry, you type tags between comas and if the that is like
"This is a Tag, This is another Tag" then it is 2 tags
This is probably the best way to do it, everyone hates the hell out of underscores

Noxid
08-17-2015, 10:32 AM
Nope, in SoFurry, you type tags between comas and if the that is like
"This is a Tag, This is another Tag" then it is 2 tags
This is probably the best way to do it, everyone hates the hell out of underscores

well at this point it seems to be the odd man out so i'm not entirely sure that really is the choice that would benefit the most people

blufawx
08-17-2015, 10:49 AM
How about this, Add an opt-out setting, if you opt-out from community tagging, the piece won't be searchable, I would prefer people be unable to search my stuff entirely if it means they won't touch my tags

That would get me to start using Weasyl again more. I've deleted all of my personal content before because of a serial tagger who got so annoying I had to go to their page, ask them to stop, tell them they were the reason I'm not using the site and then block them.

I tag my stuff with what I see. I can't control what an overly sensitive searcher wants to block. I'm not a mind reader and i don't want my content overly tagged or abused.

I would think this site would be equal parts creator/owner oriented as much as it is viewer. but it seems the viewers hold all the power.

weykent
08-17-2015, 11:46 AM
I'm not a mind reader and i don't want my content overly tagged…

Can you please explain what you mean by "overly tagged"? I'm not sure I understand how it's possible for a submission to have 'too many' tags unless some were inaccurate.

Uluri
08-17-2015, 11:54 AM
My Experience with the Tag System.

I have not experienced any Tagging abuse on any of my artworks. I, in fact, really appreciate it when people tag my content considering how Hard it is for people to find artwork based solely on tags alone via the Search system.
I like the Tagging System. (Only because of how hard it is to find what I'm looking for.)

HOWEVER, the search system is very Non-Flexible because it searches only via Tags.
It makes it difficult for Artist's works to be found. May I suggest the search to also include
Title and/or description as well to help artists become found and Watchers to find more work?

Fiz
08-17-2015, 12:31 PM
My Experience with the Tag System.

I have not experienced any Tagging abuse on any of my artworks. I, in fact, really appreciate it when people tag my content considering how Hard it is for people to find artwork based solely on tags alone via the Search system.
I like the Tagging System. (Only because of how hard it is to find what I'm looking for.)

HOWEVER, the search system is very Non-Flexible because it searches only via Tags.
It makes it difficult for Artist's works to be found. May I suggest the search to also include
Title and/or description as well to help artists become found and Watchers to find more work?

We've been mulling over ideas on how to improve the search engine. Personally I want submission titles to be searchable, and to do other things to expand it outside of a tag search.

- - - Updated - - -


username blacklisting sounds good

Let me clarify what I said

Submitter Opts-Out of Community Tagging

User using Blacklist won't see Submitter's opted-out submission in Browsing/Searching, only direct linking would allow a blacklisted work to be seen by the user.

User not using Blacklist will see everything in Browsing/Searching, even submissions with Community Tagging disabled by Submitter.




Ah okay I misread then. Thanks for clarifying.

Seems like it could work in theory but I also think a system like that would end up really confusing people as well. I can just imagine a lot of people asking "hey why is my submission showing up for one of my friends but not the other when they run a tag search?" because one friend is using blacklisting and one isn't.

DragonFlayer
08-17-2015, 12:33 PM
We've been mulling over ideas on how to improve the search engine. Personally I want submission titles to be searchable, and to do other things to expand it outside of a tag search.

How about the suggestions at Link (https://forums.weasyl.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?7738-Community-Tagging-Overview&p=89177&viewfull=1#post89177)

Matt
08-17-2015, 02:05 PM
I first want to mention how happy this thread has made me so far. I know community tagging this has been a contentious idea for a lot of people, and it's great seeing it discussed so well.

Anyway in regards to these specific points:
Submitter Opts-Out of Community Tagging

User using Blacklist won't see Submitter's opted-out submission in Browsing/Searching, only direct linking would allow a blacklisted work to be seen by the user.
I believe that's how it should go as well, at least in regards to searching. Eliminating the submissions from browsing would work best if the opt-out was on a submission-by-submission basis in my mind. Otherwise user galleries would just be entirely blank, which would not be ideal either.

User not using Blacklist will see everything in Browsing/Searching, even submissions with Community Tagging disabled by Submitter.
I'm not sure how I feel about that. At that point we're looking at a series of opt-outs in regard to the tagging process, and this specific function would be difficult to express to users, especially considering how unclear the process has presented to people as it currently is. Say I'm tired of seeing journals about proper vacuum cleaner maintenance, which is a real thing that happens all the time. If I blacklist "proper_vacuum_maintenance" suddenly a bunch of submissions disappear. It'd likely look an error more than an intentional feature.

Idea for Direct Linking of Blacklisted Submissions:
User gets a Warning Prompt telling them why the submission is in their blacklist, be it tags or username, before redirecting straight into submission after they consent to press an 'agree/accept/ok' button.
That's actually how the system is set up right now. We're 100% on board with that.

Alternate Idea for Hiding Blacklisted Content:
The content still shows up in Browsing/Searching but shows a 'WARNING' Thumbnail displaying the matching blacklist tag/username instead of the submission's original thumbnail.
This could be an interesting compromise. However, it'd take effort to make it so that galleries didn't get ugly really quick and, given the amount of coordination it could take on the development end, would not probably not be a priority. While a compromise might be something to look into down the line, but we're probably not at that stage yet.

Again, though, it's awesome to hear your and everyone else's ideas on this.

Thanks again, everyone!

blufawx
08-17-2015, 02:14 PM
Can you please explain what you mean by "overly tagged"? I'm not sure I understand how it's possible for a submission to have 'too many' tags unless some were inaccurate.

I could, sure.

If an artist or the person that commissioned the piece tagged their work, that should be good enough. I had people come in and put tags for things that weren't even in the sketch that I had drawn for me so I had a reference pic.

There can be too many tags. That's what I mean. I feel as though Weasyl is a site that gives too much power to the viewers and not enough to the artists or the commissioners.

there must be away to stop people from tagging your work. That's the reason I stopped using this site and stick to inkbunny, FA and SoFurry

weykent
08-17-2015, 02:33 PM
If an artist or the person that commissioned the piece tagged their work, that should be good enough. I had people come in and put tags for things that weren't even in the sketch that I had drawn for me so I had a reference pic.

There can be too many tags. That's what I mean. I feel as though Weasyl is a site that gives too much power to the viewers and not enough to the artists or the commissioners.

Okay. Just to make sure I understand: a submission can have too many tags when there are some number of tags which don't describe the submission.

blufawx
08-17-2015, 02:37 PM
Okay. Just to make sure I understand: a submission can have too many tags when there are some number of tags which don't describe the submission.


That's one aspect of it. I've also had a person repeat many of my same tags. or put tags in just to put tags in. The whole tagging system is pointless because other users can add tags. It makes things messy when all I want to do is post the art or the story in the stupid pdf or specific txt format that weasyl forces on us and tag it specifically as it's tagged on FA or SoFurry, then here comes Tweedledumb thinking it needs more tags or it isn't descriptive enough or that he feels like trolling.

Hence, we need either to remove the tagging features and start from scratch or an opt-in to this feature of allowing others to tag your works. Well, in this case it'd be an opt-out since the feature is unfortunately implemented.

DragonFlayer
08-17-2015, 02:41 PM
I'm not sure how I feel about that. At that point we're looking at a series of opt-outs in regard to the tagging process, and this specific function would be difficult to express to users, especially considering how unclear the process has presented to people as it currently is. Say I'm tired of seeing journals about proper vacuum cleaner maintenance, which is a real thing that happens all the time. If I blacklist "proper_vacuum_maintenance" suddenly a bunch of submissions disappear. It'd likely look an error more than an intentional feature.


Just imagine users that don't use the blacklists, users that are okay with whatever, they would get fucked over, unable to see anything people submitted with the Opt-Out option enabled, they would have to know about the Submitter to actually see it, that's what I mean with users not using the blacklist being able to see content with the community tagging disabled

Just think of it as a flag
User has 0 words/usernames in their blacklist? they see everything, from cutesy things to Cthulhu's slimy rear
User has at least 1 word/username in their blacklist? All community flagging disabled submissions are hidden from that user now

Now, I get what you mean about people not understanding or knowing the Blacklist system exists, perhaps some extra visibility would help, for example:

Click on a submission Tag, Dropdown menu shows up with options like 'Search' 'Edit' 'Blacklist'
Click on an User's name, Dropdown menu shows up with 'Blacklist' so you don't see posts from an user, but don't straight up block them as Fiz suggested

Oh, and I guess if you are following/friending an user, I guess that user shouldn't trip your blacklist, maybe? I mean, you are willingly following an user that potentially posts stuff you dislike, perhaps you tolerate that person enough to still be a follower, just sayin'

Firehazard
08-17-2015, 02:58 PM
I think our biggest issue with trying to implement an approval system is what happens to tag change requests that go to accounts that are no longer active? Without other checks in place, those tag edits would just stay in limbo forever and the submissions would still (possibly) be inaccurately tagged so people wouldn't be able to find or block it properly.
Contrariwise, the way it is now, anyone can spam a bunch of troll tags on things posted by inactive users, and nothing would ever get done about them unless a mod happened across the page. I could easily see trolls doing that.


There'd have to be a part of that system that would still make it work in those sort of circumstances. The idea I just thought of was that after a certain amount of time (lets say for example, 72 hours), if those tag edit requests are neither accepted or denied, the tags still go into effect but possibly under a different category from 'community tags' on the submission, just to show that it is a community tag but it isn't approved yet.
Do we still have ferrets? I know you still have the tag for it, but they're no longer mentioned in the FAQ. I liked the idea of a class of sub-moderators who are trusted to modify tags and nothing else, and they'd be perfect for dealing with situations like this; maybe have a sort of moderation queue that they see when they log in that reports any added tags that have gone unaddressed for maybe a week, and let them decide whether to approve them or not.

taasla
08-17-2015, 03:12 PM
I don't want users tagging slurs on my artwork. Plain and simple. If you refuse to allow me to turn the feature off, then I'd like to approve tags on the go. Once I've disapproved of something, it should remain permanently blacklisted from being added to that image.

weykent
08-17-2015, 03:23 PM
That's one aspect of it. I've also had a person repeat many of my same tags. or put tags in just to put tags in. […] here comes Tweedledumb thinking it needs more tags or it isn't descriptive enough or that he feels like trolling.

The incidence rate of people adding tags to be deliberately disruptive is very, very low. You had people do this on your submissions? Also, what does it mean if someone is adding tags "just to put tags in"? I would think that someone who is adding tags to your submissions is typically doing it with good intent.

Adding a system that supports relationships between tags, whether it's by implication or whatever else, will cut down dramatically on people adding synonyms. It should also make tag searching a lot easier.

- - - Updated - - -


I don't want users tagging slurs on my artwork. Plain and simple. If you refuse to allow me to turn the feature off, then I'd like to approve tags on the go. Once I've disapproved of something, it should remain permanently blacklisted from being added to that image.

Are slurs the only thing you have an issue with? We've been talking for a while about methods to prevent users from adding 'inherently controversial' tags to submissions.

taasla
08-17-2015, 03:37 PM
The incidence rate of people adding tags to be deliberately disruptive is very, very low. You had people do this on your submissions? Also, what does it mean if someone is adding tags "just to put tags in"? I would think that someone who is adding tags to your submissions is typically doing it with good intent.

Adding a system that supports relationships between tags, whether it's by implication or whatever else, will cut down dramatically on people adding synonyms. It should also make tag searching a lot easier.

- - - Updated - - -



Are slurs the only thing you have an issue with? We've been talking for a while about methods to prevent users from adding 'inherently controversial' tags to submissions.

Yes, that is my main and only reason for wanting to opt out. I've had this issue on SoFurry and was forced to opt out of third party tagging. I have no problems adding things manually for people.

I don't know if Weasyl could consider a filter or something that would make these items be manual approval while everything else was just auto set to go up. Would that even be possible?

I can't speak for everyone else who wants to opt out of third party tagging, but that is my only issue.

weykent
08-17-2015, 03:49 PM
I don't know if Weasyl could consider a filter or something that would make these items be manual approval while everything else was just auto set to go up. Would that even be possible?

Yes. I think the implementation we had in mind was that only the submitter could add such tags, and the community at large is just strictly disallowed even from suggesting it.

Matt
08-17-2015, 03:57 PM
Contrariwise, the way it is now, anyone can spam a bunch of troll tags on things posted by inactive users, and nothing would ever get done about them unless a mod happened across the page. I could easily see trolls doing that.
That is a concern for us in very much the same way that people leaving harmful comments on inactive users' shouts page or gallery is. Just as in those cases, the person acting against site rules will be attended to within the community guidelines. The key difference in this case is that the type of abuse you're describing is inherently searchable and therefore more easily found and dealt with. There's potential for mailce in any system that allows for unmoderated submission (this means galleries to shouts to comments to notes to tags), but, if anything, tags are the easiest to catch out on our end.

Just as in any other case harassment, abuse, slurs, or anything against the CG will be acted upon as best we're able.

BlueJaySF
08-17-2015, 05:24 PM
Can you explain why that is?

Because I'm the person uploading it, nobody else.

ganache
08-17-2015, 05:27 PM
Regarding this, I actually can't think of any site that lets you tag this way?
FA separates by spaces
DA and Tumblr use twitter-style hashtags (they either use underscores or mash both words together, depending on whatever someone feels like doing)

Even though multi-word tags on tumblr are hyphenated in links, they still have to be typed as "such and such tag" or they will fail. I'm under the impression it's a way of typing tags out that many people are just accustomed to now, flawed like that or not.

But tag entry difficulties aside - on community tagging, what frustrates me (as I've said... often, it feels like - ) is that in addition to problems addressed already, it leaves no room for what I can only figure to call "public obscurity". A way to not be included in tags results without locking the work or your profile away.
Some people just like posting to the void! Without being so private as to shut everyone out. And while I understand ways to be discovered should be prioritized on an art site, having no way to not be without literally hiding things disappoints me.

"Tag what you see" has its disadvantages when what's seen isn't what the submitter wanted to have highlighted in the first place, I agree with that. Or maybe they don't want to attract anyone through a specific tag (or any tag, even). The nuances of why a person would post what they don't want to be involved in doesn't matter imo. Having control over your work online is difficult enough, and its organization (through tags) not being in our own hands is just one more thing to worry about when posting here.

I'll admit the catch is not being sure how blacklisting can be addressed while solving this inclusion problem, but. Yeah I'm not a fan of community tagging not being at least opt-in/out, since my experience as a poster is more important to me than my experience as a browser. To talk from that perspective, I do use blacklists, but my enjoyment of the site is not ruled by whether or not it kicks in properly. Even though I have the power to tag things, I honestly haven't because it feels disrespectful. "Do unto others" etc. etc.....

weykent
08-17-2015, 07:09 PM
Because I'm the person uploading it, nobody else.

Sure, but you should take a look at the rest of the replies in this thread. There are use cases for allowing the community at large to add tags to submissions. How do you feel about this situation I explained to someone else:


If a user very strongly does not want to view, say, nonconsensual situations depicted in art, a submitter posts more than a few submissions which do depict such situations which are not tagged as such, and the submitter refuses to add a tag to indicate that, what should a user be able to do other than block all submissions by that submitter?

BlueJaySF
08-17-2015, 07:12 PM
Sure, but you should take a look at the rest of the replies in this thread.

I did. My stance remains the same.

Firehazard
08-17-2015, 07:37 PM
BlueJaySF, at this point what you're defending is basically on par with submitting porn and flagging it as General Audience, in terms of saying "fuck you" to people who don't want to see it. Hate to be so blunt about it, but I feel like I need to get across to you how others are going to perceive your position.

BlueJaySF
08-17-2015, 07:54 PM
I am not comfortable with other people being able to add tags to my uploads. I am more than capable of doing so myself, and if anyone feels I should add or remove a tag, then there's nothing stopping them from contacting me. If they have a valid reason that I find myself agreeing with, then perhaps I will add or remove suggested tags.

I have no issue with the staff being able to moderate a submission's tags or its classification to prevent tag/upload abuse; I would be disappointed if they lacked the power to handle a situation so.

But in terms of the general community being able to amateur-moderate my uploads? No. That's my place and no one else's.

Draw as many comparisons as you desire in as blunt a manner as you choose to, you are far off the mark. I do not want faces in the crowd making personal adjustments to my uploads unless I have full involvement.

blufawx
08-17-2015, 07:55 PM
The incidence rate of people adding tags to be deliberately disruptive is very, very low. You had people do this on your submissions? Also, what does it mean if someone is adding tags "just to put tags in"? I would think that someone who is adding tags to your submissions is typically doing it with good intent.

I wouldn't expect staff to not see anything wrong with the status quo. this attitude is exactly why I'm deleting my content up there now and asking any artists I commission, not to post the content on weasyl.

- - - Updated - - -


BlueJaySF, at this point what you're defending is basically on par with submitting porn and flagging it as General Audience, in terms of saying "fuck you" to people who don't want to see it. Hate to be so blunt about it, but I feel like I need to get across to you how others are going to perceive your position.

At this point, I have to agree with him. I'm the one that paid for that commission, or went to the artist and got the request free. No one else. If I'm uploading it on my internet connection that I pay for no one else should be tagging it uselessly.

half the time when someone does tag something I've posted on weasyl, i've just gone in and deleted it anyway then blocked that user.

weykent
08-17-2015, 08:11 PM
I am not comfortable with other people being able to add tags to my uploads. I am more than capable of doing so myself, and if anyone feels I should add or remove a tag, then there's nothing stopping them from contacting me. If they have a valid reason that I find myself agreeing with, then perhaps I will add or remove suggested tags.

I have no issue with the staff being able to moderate a submission's tags or its classification to prevent tag/upload abuse; I would be disappointed if they lacked the power to handle a situation so.

But in terms of the general community being able to amateur-moderate my uploads? No. That's my place and no one else's.

Draw as many comparisons as you desire in as blunt a manner as you choose to, you are far off the mark. I do not want faces in the crowd making personal adjustments to my uploads unless I have full involvement.

How about this: can you explain what it is that you lose by allowing community tagging? Both you and the community stand to gain from it: you get more exposure, and the community can find your submissions more easily.


I wouldn't expect staff to not see anything wrong with the status quo. this attitude is exactly why I'm deleting my content up there now and asking any artists I commission, not to post the content on weasyl.

I'm more than willing to listen to people explain what it is that they wish to get out of disabling community tagging, as long as it's explained beyond "because I said so". There is a lot of FUD about tagging, which I'm trying to dispel while getting people to explain in more detail what it is that they really want. You are wrong about staff being content with the status quo; I've made multiple posts about how the staff have been thinking about changing the tag system. The news post itself even says: "This system is still in progress to its best state."

blufawx
08-17-2015, 08:13 PM
How about this: can you explain what it is that you lose by allowing community tagging? Both you and the community stand to gain from it: you get more exposure, and the community can find your submissions more easily.

you also gain more trolling, less articulate tags, less control over your work/commission.

communism didn't work in Russia either.

Webster
08-17-2015, 08:15 PM
Regarding underscores vs. spaces, the one thing I highly suggest is having an option to auto-convert from one to the other. Additionally, being able to copy the tags after entering, as well as being able to paste tags when posting a submission, are really handy things. Currently I upload a submission to FA, Weasyl, and InkBunny at the same time. The great thing is I can copy and paste the title, description (minus link/icon/formatting changes), and tags from FA into Weasyl and InkBunny. It takes at most an extra couple of minutes to upload to all three vs. just one (and sometimes four, if I upload to DA, too). One of the things I do not like about SoFurry is I cannot paste the tags in, as it only uses spaces. InkBunny at least auto-converts.

Secondly, I do think there needs to be a way to allow tags to be added. I have seen too many artists that refuse to use tags. If they don't want their work to be found, then why are they even posting their art online? Automatically blacklisting, or at least putting up a thumbnail with "untagged" by default (maybe the actual icon is blurred a bit, with the text on top?) I'm okay with, but I still really don't like the fact that artists can just leave works untagged. I try to tag my pictures as accurately as possible, and I welcome genuine feedback on it. I feel like there should be some middle ground between giving artists full control and doing something about artists that refuse to use tags or ignore older work.

I think community removal of tags should require the artist to approve them, since on the whole they generally know what is accurate for a picture.

Providing suggestions (for both spelling and alternatives, e.g. cat -> feline|house-cat) I think would be good to help create a consistent searching/browsing/blacklisting experience. Maybe suggestions for alternatives could appear below and the user could just click on it to add it to the list, and have an 'add all' button to easily accept all suggestions. This would minimize the amount of community tagging necessary to keep consistency. Another thing would be to have a list of common tag types (gender, weight, species, genitals, etc) to remind artists what to add. I know the reminders on another art site have helped me on occasion.

As for community addition of tags, having an option to approve before use would be good, but doesn't help with accounts that artists don't pay attention to or abandon. Maybe having a timeout of some time, e.g. a month, after which if an artist hasn't approved/disapproved the tags, they get added automatically, and have the ability to report bad tags so if someone is adding bad tags to abandoned accounts they can be quickly reported and handled.

I feel community tagging is greatly beneficial, but I have seen plenty of bone-headed decisions made about adding/removing tags from upload sites like e.g. e621 (including art of my own character), so I understand the hesitation of some folks. But throwing it out completely seems like a waste of a valuable resource (the community).

Aden
08-17-2015, 08:50 PM
Here's a probably unfeasible idea: what about removing community tagging entirely, but upping the minimum amount of tags required to submit a piece? Double the amount? Triple it?

Main problem with that is, the work would be quite well-described, but uploading would become so much more tedious. Community tagging was meant as a means to offload that burden from point-of-upload, but it comes with the control tradeoff.

weykent
08-17-2015, 08:52 PM
you also gain more trolling, less articulate tags, less control over your work/commission.

re: trolling, that almost never happens. I asked if it happened to you, and you declined to comment?
re: articulate tagging, that's not unique to community tagging, and there's a number of ontological things that can be done there which have been discussed in the thread.
re: less control, tags are metadata. To this point, I'm curious: if any of your art goes up on, say, e621, do you feel the need to control the tags on those submissions too?

- - - Updated - - -


Here's a probably unfeasible idea: what about removing community tagging entirely, but upping the minimum amount of tags required to submit a piece? Double the amount? Triple it?

Even with the two-tag minimum, there's people who tag things just "as" "df" or "fuck" "tagging".

BlueJaySF
08-17-2015, 08:55 PM
How about this: can you explain what it is that you lose by allowing community tagging?

I honestly don't feel that loss has anything to do with it.


Both you and the community stand to gain from it: you get more exposure, and the community can find your submissions more easily.

I tag my works as I feel is appropriate, and if someone thinks I missed something, again, they can speak to me and I will see whether or not it should be added or removed. There's nothing preventing someone from browsing my profile or folders for more of my uploads if one thing or another catches their eye.

blufawx
08-17-2015, 09:02 PM
re: trolling, that almost never happens. I asked if it happened to you, and you declined to comment?
re: articulate tagging, that's not unique to community tagging, and there's a number of ontological things that can be done there which have been discussed in the thread.
re: less control, tags are metadata. To this point, I'm curious: if any of your art goes up on, say, e621, do you feel the need to control the tags on those submissions too?

Funny, I could have sworn I said I did have it happen to me. See what I mean by site staff? don't pay attention. Thus I've already made a picture for FA that says artists can't post my commissions to Weasyl.

E621? If I see my stuff, commissioned or otherwise, up at that site I issue a take down notice. and I check twice daily for it.

- - - Updated - - -


Not that I expect it to be implemented.

At this point I don't expect any ideas to be implemented and that this thread is for show only.

piñardilla
08-17-2015, 11:23 PM
I feel that a lot of the resistance to community tagging mostly has to do with culture shock. I don't have statistics, but I think it's a safe assumption that the vast majority of our current userbase migrated here from other art sites. With coming from another site comes being accustomed to things working in certain ways, and somewhat of an expectation that those things will work the same way here, minus whatever one thing made them leave or branch out from where they first came from.

Thing is though, Weasyl isn't intended to be just a slightly-improved clone of any existing site. Our devteam is really trying to look forwards and innovate, and Weasyl is designed from the ground up with the intention of bringing the best user experience to both artists and art consumers. They've engineered the functionality of its features with that in mind. And for some things, if we just copy what everyone else does just because it's what people are used to, it can really impede what we're trying to do.

So, tags. They're one of those things. Many other sites give content owners complete control over tags, because tags are honestly somewhat of an afterthought at those places – they usually use categories as their primary search system instead. Content with joke tags or no tags at all attached are common, and even when tagging is taken seriously, it's rare to see more than a dozen tags attached. The usefulness of tags tends to range from okayish to worthless as a result.

Weasyl doesn't use a category search, though, because such a system is inherently restricting to whatever predefined options are provided, and the more options that are provided, the more of an unwieldy mess it becomes. Here, aside from the front page, tags are the way consumers find art from people they're not already watching. We don't have the luxury of being able to leave tag usefulness in a lackluster state. What I foresee happening, if we allow complete opting-out of community tagging, is that when people come here from elsewhere, they have an immediate reaction of "This is different! I don't like this! I'm turning this off!" Then they batch transfer their gallery over, get a few watchers from whoever is looking at the front page at the time, and a few weeks of inactivity later say "Nobody must use this site because I can't get any watchers, I'm leaving!"

And then there are places like *booru-like archives. While these have a lot of ethical issues with how they respect artist rights that we certainly don't want to introduce here, they quite frankly have great tagging and are a proof of concept that a community tagging search system works. A dozen tags is a low number on any given image, and to be completely honest if I don't know or can't remember who created a pic I've seen before, searching one of these places is generally what I try first. Ideally, we'd like to get a tagging system as close to that useful as possible without introducing the problems of trampling creator intent that these places have (i.e. "Tag What You See").

So here Weasyl sits at an impasse, where we have a system where tags are metadata and the primary means of connecting your art to the people who want to see it and haven't already discovered you yet, but a community of creators that's mostly used to seeing tags as generally functionless but nonetheless something they own as part of their content. Culture shock. What we ultimately want to accomplish in this discussion is finding a solution that protects the presentation of your own work sufficiently for you be comfortable with the idea of letting go of tags as being something wholly within your domain. This is important, because right now community tagging is a feature that we currently see as being sorely underutilized and we'd actually like it to be much more commonly used than it is now.

We already have a few ideas, but it's a careful balancing act to give creators the power to define their own content without breaking the usefulness of Weasyl as a gallery for consumers. I like the idea that came up of a time window after a tag is added for the owner to reject it. Other ideas that have came up in past staff discussions are tags that are removed by the content owner not being able to be re-added, or having a number of tags on uploads that can be pre-emptively blocked. For these ideas to work, though, reflexive rejection of all community tags has to stop. So please, what we'd really like to get out of this discussion is finding out what that would take.

Swanda
08-18-2015, 12:00 AM
Quote Originally Posted by Swanda View Post
- Hidden tags would also be a huuuge help in addition to that.
They would be tags that wouldn't display on the submission for anyone but staff and the creator.
These tags would be ignored by the search but would get picked up by the blocking filter.
Tags not yet approved or discarded by the artist would be seen as hidden tags by the site.
So if the tag is added by someone who is blocking it, the submission would disappear from their view instantly, while it wouldn't show up in searches, or appear on the submission to viewers.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This has come up several times in the past, but I still think it's a bad idea. We already get a lot of support requests saying basically "why can I see my post but my friend can't?" when the issue is the choice of maximum content rating. If submissions were silently filtered out without any user-visible explanation, that's horrible UX


I'm having a hard time seeing how this would cause additional confusion?
Hidden tag or not that submission wouldn't appear for the one blocking it regardless, so nothing have really changed on that end. It's not like the warning you get when linked to something with a blocked tag is telling you what that it is either? It really just is "This submission is tagged with something you have blocked, continue if you want."

blufawx
08-18-2015, 12:00 AM
For these ideas to work, though, reflexive rejection of all community tags has to stop.

that's not going to happen, I think. I own my content, I paid for it or I drew it. Why should I give Karl Marx the ability to tag it as he pleases? What makes him just as, if not more, worthy of tagging my stuff compared to me?

Webster
08-18-2015, 12:58 AM
that's not going to happen, I think. I own my content, I paid for it or I drew it. Why should I give Karl Marx the ability to tag it as he pleases? What makes him just as, if not more, worthy of tagging my stuff compared to me?

Firstly, calling other users of the site "Karl Marx" isn't a good way to get your argument taken seriously. I also don't know why you're bring "worth" into this. This site is a community of people. Some make art. Some enjoy art others made. Some do both. If you don't want to be part of a community, I suggest making your own website with its own gallery. You can show your art exactly as you please.

However, by allowing people to basically go "Hey, people looking for stuff, if you're looking for <x> this other picture might be up your alley", you help others to find your work, and in turn people who are interested in your art. If you're not taking commissions and don't care whether or not people are watching you, then fine. But if you're concerned people are going to be labeling your art in some way, you probably shouldn't even post it on the Internet, as heaven forbid someone might create a link to your art with words describing it that you don't like; that you have no recourse except complaining to the person and hoping they listen, if you can even find a way to contact them.

At least with tags you can later change them if you really find they are not properly describing the art. But I'd go as far as to say that most artists don't know every single keyword right away. I see no problem with having the community help you out.

What exact problems do you have? If it's abuse, then help us figure out ways to combat abuse. If it's people incorrectly tagging, then help us figure out ways to prevent that from happening.

Personally, I think requiring approval for removing tags ensures that your tags at least are always there. Allowing extra tags on top of that helps everyone who wants to or doesn't want to see it, as well as helps people find you such that you can build up a great network of followers, whether in terms of commissions or sharing art you like or just people to talk with.

How about this. An idea to prevent abuse:
* If a person is newer to the site than some amount of time, e.g. 2 weeks, all community tags they provide must be approved.
Or
* If a person is new to the site, all tags must be approved until they have had at least some amount of tags approved with less than a certain amount rejected, e.g. at least 10 approved, no more than 2 rejected.
Or
* A person must maintain a high ratio of tags approved vs rejected to continue adding tags without approval. Tags remain until approved/rejected.

And if a person is reported for bad tagging and are found to have abused the system, they are prevented from tagging others submissions in the future.

Then while removals still require approval, only people who show a history of tagging things well can add tags, and those who abuse it will be prevented from tagging.

blufawx
08-18-2015, 01:48 AM
Or you can just have a checkbox that allows an artist, or a commission poster to opt-out of allowing others to tag their art.

An opt-in policy is what should have been instituted from the beginning of this site.

If you noticed, my weasyl doesn't have any art in it. It used to, and stories too.

But it doesn't now. Why? The tagging system stinks, including the allowing the 'community' to tag things and Weasyl doesn't allow the much, much easier formats of .docx, .doc or .odt. Even rtf would be great. Now the only art you'll see attached to my name is when an artist that has a page here posts something.

Eskiworks
08-18-2015, 01:49 AM
How about this. An idea to prevent abuse:
* If a person is newer to the site than some amount of time, e.g. 2 weeks, all community tags they provide must be approved.
Or
* If a person is new to the site, all tags must be approved until they have had at least some amount of tags approved with less than a certain amount rejected, e.g. at least 10 approved, no more than 2 rejected.
Or
* A person must maintain a high ratio of tags approved vs rejected to continue adding tags without approval. Tags remain until approved/rejected.

And if a person is reported for bad tagging and are found to have abused the system, they are prevented from tagging others submissions in the future.

Then while removals still require approval, only people who show a history of tagging things well can add tags, and those who abuse it will be prevented from tagging.

Just chiming back in to say I LIKE this idea! =D Personally this solution or something like it would satisfy what few concerns I have with the tagging system.

weykent
08-18-2015, 03:48 AM
Funny, I could have sworn I said I did have it happen to me.

So, I looked it up, and only one of your submissions had tags added by a user who wasn't you, and its tags were modified by only one user. There were only four tags added: "furry", "hermaphrodite", "solo", and "clothes". Can you explain which of these felt like "trolling" to you?

weykent
08-18-2015, 03:55 AM
Just paving the way for abuse

If we were going to remove features due to abuse potential, we'd have to shut down the site. :)

Someone already (a while ago, now) registered a horde of user accounts to spam the front page with thumbnails abusing someone.


I'm having a hard time seeing how this would cause additional confusion?
Hidden tag or not that submission wouldn't appear for the one blocking it regardless, so nothing have really changed on that end. It's not like the warning you get when linked to something with a blocked tag is telling you what that it is either? It really just is "This submission is tagged with something you have blocked, continue if you want."

Consider gallery listings. Someone links to a user, not a submission directly, and one user can see some things and the other can't.

weykent
08-18-2015, 10:25 AM
I've said it offhand before, but I just ran some numbers to back up my statements of "malicious tagging is extremely uncommon".

As of right now, there are 105,621 accounts registered on Weasyl, and of those accounts, 103 of them have been permanently banned, 585 of them have added tags to submissions which weren't their own, and 3 of them have had their tagging privileges revoked. This means that about 0.1% of users who have registered an account have gone on to be permanently banned, and 0.5% of users who have tagged others' submissions have gone on to had their tagging privileges revoked. That's the same order of magnitude, even if it's marginally more common to lose tagging privileges.

I can try to run more numbers if anyone else has questions about statistics on community tagging.

Fiz
08-18-2015, 10:29 AM
I've said it offhand before, but I just ran some numbers to back up my statements of "malicious tagging is extremely uncommon".

As of right now, there are 105,621 accounts registered on Weasyl, and of those accounts, 103 of them have been permanently banned, 585 of them have added tags to submissions which weren't their own, and 3 of them have had their tagging privileges revoked. This means that about 0.1% of users who have registered an account have gone on to be permanently banned, and 0.5% of users who have tagged others' submissions have gone on to had their tagging privileges revoked. That's the same order of magnitude, even if it's marginally more common to lose tagging privileges.

I can try to run more numbers if anyone else has questions about statistics on community tagging.

Generally, our users are quite well behaved. I mean it when I say this but this site is genuinely the nicest community wise that I've ever worked on, administrative wise.


Though I actually agree with one thing that has popped up a few times in the thread. If someone adds a tag to your submission and you remove it, it shouldn't be allowed to be placed again unless the uploader does it or a staff member does it.

blufawx
08-18-2015, 12:26 PM
So, I looked it up, and only one of your submissions had tags added by a user who wasn't you, and its tags were modified by only one user. There were only four tags added: "furry", "hermaphrodite", "solo", and "clothes". Can you explain which of these felt like "trolling" to you?

Oh, I'm completely sure you looked it up given that I haven't had a hermaphrodite character until today and shi's not in my gallery since nothing is in my gallery as of today because of the community tagging.

weykent
08-18-2015, 12:32 PM
Oh, I'm completely sure you looked it up given that I haven't had a hermaphrodite character until today and shi's not in my gallery since nothing is in my gallery as of today because of the community tagging.

Is your profile https://www.weasyl.com/~swiftpawz ? Tag information is kept around even for deleted submissions.

- - - Updated - - -

The only reason I looked this up at all is because I wanted to understand what tags you felt were "trolling". If you can't remember what tags it were you felt that way about, and/or you had a different account this happened on, I can look that up instead to try to jog your memory.

blufawx
08-18-2015, 12:38 PM
Is your profile https://www.weasyl.com/~swiftpawz ? Tag information is kept around even for deleted submissions.

- - - Updated - - -

The only reason I looked this up at all is because I wanted to understand what tags you felt were "trolling". If you can't remember what tags it were you felt that way about, and/or you had a different account this happened on, I can look that up instead to try to jog your memory.

Wouldn't do any good, I wouldn't believe or trust you anyway. Personally, i think you're doing this to shut down the topic and to silence me. I would like to think that I would know my characters and what I posted. So now you've not only said that I'm a liar but wrong.

weykent
08-18-2015, 12:42 PM
Wouldn't do any good, I wouldn't believe or trust you anyway. Personally, i think you're doing this to shut down the topic and to silence me. I would like to think that I would know my characters and what I posted. So now you've not only said that I'm a liar but wrong.

I'm not calling anyone a liar. I want to understand your position, and with a lack of information provided by you, my only recourse is to attempt to look it up myself. You certainly don't have to trust me to list the tags you felt were "trolling". I think that understanding what tags you take offense to is a very important part of discussing what to do about tagging.

blufawx
08-18-2015, 12:45 PM
As I've said before, since I will no longer converse with that staff member, there should have been an opt-in on community tagging since day one. Since there wasn't, there should now be an opt-out. Quite frankly, I think weasyl gives too much power to the 'viewer' at the expense of the creator and the person commissioning the piece. I don't think that's right or fair. The viewer isn't the one spending the time creating that piece, nor are they the ones spending the money to pay for the piece.

As I've said before, it's one of the reasons why I keep my pieces off of the site now. The only reason I come here is to see what the artist posted, if they post it here, about the piece I commissioned.

Swanda
08-18-2015, 12:52 PM
Consider gallery listings. Someone links to a user, not a submission directly, and one user can see some things and the other can't.

But that is already how it works NOW?

Fiz
08-18-2015, 12:54 PM
Wouldn't do any good, I wouldn't believe or trust you anyway. Personally, i think you're doing this to shut down the topic and to silence me. I would like to think that I would know my characters and what I posted. So now you've not only said that I'm a liar but wrong.

No one is calling you a liar. I'm not even sure what you would be being called a liar about? You said you got trolling/incorrect tags, and Weykent checked logs to see what tag changes you received. He was trying to figure out which tags were added to your submissions that you felt were inaccurate, abusive or otherwise problematic. If someone is getting abusive or purposely inaccurate tags, we want to know so the staff can intervene if necessary. Nobody even said anything regarding your characters, so I'm not sure where that part came into play.

No one is trying to be silenced either. We wouldn't be opening up community discussions such as this one if we didn't want to hear what people's thoughts were.

weykent
08-18-2015, 12:56 PM
But that is already how it works NOW?

No. There is user-visible information on the submissions, whether it's tags or rating or whatever else. If there was some subset of "hidden" tags which are used for filtering but not displayed to anyone, there would be no user-visible information about why it was blocked.

Swanda
08-18-2015, 01:09 PM
No. There is user-visible information on the submissions, whether it's tags or rating or whatever else. If there was some subset of "hidden" tags which are used for filtering but not displayed to anyone, there would be no user-visible information about why it was blocked.

But that IS how it works now?
The user not blocking will see submissions in the gallery overview that the person tag-blocking wouldn't.
It is literally the exact same thing that is happening now, that would happen then.
If the user then links one of the hidden submissions to the other, a warning will appear telling the submission is hidden from your view due to a tag they have blocked. I'm not sure how more user-visible the information could get than that warning page?

Bloodhound
08-18-2015, 01:16 PM
I have a feeling I might regret stepping into the fray, but here goes anyway.

It seems to me that this issue is pretty well divided on who is for community-tagging, and who is against it. Those that are against it tend to be artists, and those that are for it typically are not artists.

Actually, let's not say 'artists' right off the bat, because that seems to leave out people who submit stories or other content. I'll say 'content creators' instead, I think. CCs for shorthand. Still with me? Okay cool.

CCs probably, for the most part, feel edgy about letting the community at large have the ability to alter their uploads. That's essentially what adding tags to a submission is - changing the original upload to suit the needs of someone other than the original poster. And really, given that the furry community can be somewhat abusive or dismissive to artists, that doesn't really surprise me. People get their art (or whatever other content) stolen and redistributed and doctored pretty frequently in this fandom. Even if it's never happened to you personally, just witnessing instances of it can put you on guard. Is it really any wonder that CCs are apprehensive about this tagging system?

I understand the idea behind it; People can add a tag to something they don't want to see, so that that particular submission gets snared by the tag-block system (or whatever it's called), a sort of trigger-warning helper. Then of course you have the idea that, if any user can add a tag to any submission, that submission is whatever-percent more likely to be found with submissions of similar subject matter. Both seem like Positive Ideas from the outside.

So there's two sides to the coin. On one side, you have CCs feeling encroached upon by this system if it stays in place as-is, and on the other side you have non-CC users feeling like their options to be comfortable on the site are diminished if the system changes or is eliminated. Neither side is going to be completely happy (but I think we've all come to that conclusion haha!).

Here's a probably controversial and unpopular thought: Weasyl is, first and foremost, a content-driven site. Unless I'm wrong (and I might be!) this site was created so CCs had a place that wasn't FA (or the ink one or whatever) to upload their content, and have a community of people that could view, comment on, fav, and discuss it. Yes? So, without CCs, Weasyl would not exist as it does. Right? If that's the case, and if this site counts on CCs uploading their content, shouldn't it strive to make it CC-friendly? (Of course, I'm an artist, so my view is going to be skewed in that direction. And I'm in no way suggesting that non-CCs don't count, or don't matter, or don't deserve to be heard or to weigh in on things. So please don't assume that's my viewpoint, or put words in my mouth about it!) And yes, without users to comment on (or fave or whatever) the content, most CCs would lose interest and drift away. Non-CCs are important too! But if the spring-board for this site was as a 'social gallery', wouldn't it make sense to think 'How is this rule going to affect the content creators in a beneficial way, so they continue or increase adding content to the site?' from the get-go?

Let's get back to the issues of having community tagging (at least in my opinion).

There's going to be instances of abuse here. Not many, perhaps, because Weasyl is still a relatively small site I think. But it HAS cropped up (ie most complaints I've seen involve trans images being labeled with 'cuntboy' and 'futa' and things that aren't really what the CC had in mind when uploading) in places, leaving the person who uploaded their piece feeling either misunderstood or maybe even trolled. And at some point, I'm sure there's going to be flat-out trolling via community tagging, especially if there's bad blood between a certain CC and a certain user. I mean, come on, the furry community is ripe with personal conflicts!

But even if a tag is added in a way that the user thought was 'helpful', if it's unwelcome or unwanted by the CC, then it's harmful to the CC.

Personally, I don't think my gallery is going to be subject to tag-abuse. But just because I don't personally don't foresee it doesn't mean it won't happen to other people. So if you're about to reply with 'but if you're not worried, why are you complaining?', be prepared for me to copy/paste that second sentence in this paragraph.

I can, however, see the likelihood of someone 'mistagging' my work, or adding tags I'm not comfortable with. I'll give you an example, since examples usually make things click better:

I'm somewhat well-known in the micro/macro community, because I draw a lot of micro art. One of the things that usually goes hand-in-hand with micro art is vore. And I am not interested in or comfortable with vore. I am not, and have never been, a vore artist. But let's say I've drawn a piece that has a micro character lounging around in the mouth of a regular-sized character. No chewing, no swallowing, no blood, maybe not even excessive saliva. Mouth-play, I would call it. But here comes TinyFurry* to my gallery, and TinyFurry is interested in vore. He sees my mouth-play piece, and likes it! 'Oh, it should have a tag on there for vore!', thinks TinyFurry, who then helpfully (in his mind) adds the tag 'vore'.

Then, until I log in and get the notification** that a tag has been added to my piece, and can then delete it, my art is being associated with a subject matter I'm not comfortable with. I specifically did not add that tag, because I don't want the association; But because a user added it for me (and not maliciously!), it's now on MY hands to remove it. Extra work for me, with the downside of 'Oh no, how many people saw this tag and are now thinking vore is something I do or will do?'.

And yes, I am well aware that people will see my art alongside other micro/macro pieces with vore content, either here or on FA or whatever other place on the net, and make that connection. I get it, really. But if this is a gallery that I started, and is under my control, I should have the ability to try and dissociate with vore as much as I can or feel comfortable doing. Chances are, TinyFurry might have added my piece to his fav's anyway, so his buddies that also like micro stuff would probably see it, vore-tag or no vore-tag.

But, see the issue? TinyFurry did nothing mean-spirited, but it created discomfort and extra work for me. Now I'm less comfortable and enthusiastic about using this site.

I think the idea of community tagging appeals to enough people, even CCs, that it should go on. However, I think it needs to be regulated more than 'CC has the ability to remove tag and stop users from removing CC's tag'.

If there's not going to be an opt-out for CC (and it looks like there won't be), then there should be the ability for the CC to approve tags before they are attached to the submission. Not only will this prevent the CC from having their work associated with something they don't approve of or aren't comfortable with, but it might make them consider other tags they could possibly add.

Does that mean some CCs will never allow community tags to filter through? Yes.

Does that mean some pieces will get clicked on and 'trigger' someone who sees something they don't like? Yes.

Does this mean some pieces won't be snatched by a search because they don't have the x, y, or z tag? Yes.

But, as an artist, I should have final say in how my art is presented on this site. If that means an image doesn't show up on as many searches, that's fine. If that means someone will 'accidentally' click on my piece that features something they don't like, so they decide to stop watching me, that's also fine. The internet is full of things that piss off or scare or squick people, and chances are you're going to come across something you think is bleh without meaning to. That's reality. I know I've done it plenty of times! But my reaction is to hit the back button and go look at a picture of a pug to make it better.

I'm glad that the tag-blocking exists, because it WILL help a lot of users avoid plenty of things they want to avoid. But it's never going to be 100%, regardless of whether or not community tagging exists. Be thankful that there is some control over it, and allow CCs to maintain control over their own galleries.

TL/DR please implement a 'user must approve added tags' feature.



*if there really is someone named TinyFurry on this site, then I apologize XD

**thank goodness that we have the option to remove tags, good call on the staff's part with that!

skylerbunny
08-18-2015, 01:17 PM
I'd like to take a moment to speak in general to all readers of this thread, given the direction some of it has gone. Community tagging/tags used as metadata/not exclusive to the original poster is a dynamic that has been around since the very beginnings of Weasyl in 2012. We as a team have never tried to be secretive about the fact that we use it, or about how it works. We try, and have tried, to be as open about how it works as possible.

We care about our community. If readers here have been unaware that community tagging exists and is a foundation of Weasyl, and searching, that is our own failing. That being said, if any user reading can think of ways that we can make 'the fact that this kind of tagging is used on our website' more visible than it is, we're more than happy to hear feedback about that.

Over time we have made changes to how our tagging system works, including 'the ability to prevent any given user from tagging submissions', when it has been demonstrated in a moderators' report that they are tagging in bad faith, and 'sending notifications sent to a submitter whenever tags on their own works are changed'. Neither were possible on Weasyl before 2014. I have no doubt as time goes on that other changes to make the system more beneficial will be made. I can already say we've seen constructive feedback here that is being discussed.

Any Weasyl user who wishes to delete their content based on the existence of community tagging will be missed by our community, and I don't say that sarcastically. As said above, any feedback that helps make more clear that the system is in use here, and how it works, is welcome. Weasyl's success is not based upon our userbase not understanding how the system works, but the complete opposite.

weykent
08-18-2015, 01:25 PM
But that IS how it works now?
The user not blocking will see submissions in the gallery overview that the person tag-blocking wouldn't.
It is literally the exact same thing that is happening now, that would happen then.
If the user then links one of the hidden submissions to the other, a warning will appear telling the submission is hidden from your view due to a tag they have blocked. I'm not sure how more user-visible the information could get than that warning page?

Sure, iff the user blocking the tag was directly linked to the submission, there could be a warning page. Regarding visibility, what I mean is this:

If:

User U1 is blocking tag T.
User U2 is not blocking tag T.
Submission S1 has tag T.
Submission S2 does not have tag T.

Then:

U1 will not see S1.
U1 will see S2.
U2 will see S1 and S2.
If T is not a hidden tag, then U2 can look at S1 and S2 and see that one has T and one does not.
If T is a hidden tag on S1, then U2 can not look at S1 and S2 and see that one has T and one does not, because neither submission will appear to have T.

As an aside, I had forgotten until writing this post just how truly obnoxious it is to format text with bbcode.

- - - Updated - - -


<snip>

First, thank you for your post on the subject. I think you bring up some interesting points! :)

Let me make a suggestion, because I wonder how you or other would feel. What if community-added tags weren't directly shown on the submission, but required some extra clicks to see? The submitter-chosen tags would still be shown on the submission directly, but now you're not directly associated with what else the community has chosen.

Swanda
08-18-2015, 02:04 PM
Sure, iff the user blocking the tag was directly linked to the submission, there could be a warning page.


There Is a warning page Now X)
Seen it many times when opening all submissions in my inbox.
I guess the blocked tag have been added After the submission prosses, and as such the thumb had already landed in my inbox.

(just as a small side note)

weykent
08-18-2015, 02:11 PM
There Is a warning page Now X)
Seen it many times when opening all submissions in my inbox.
I guess the blocked tag have been added After the submission prosses, and as such the thumb had already landed in my inbox.

(just as a small side note)

This is the current behavior, yes. There are no hidden tags, so the current behavior in that situation is not defined. Does this make my objection more clear?

blufawx
08-18-2015, 02:11 PM
But, as an artist, I should have final say in how my art is presented on this site

THIS a thousand times this. Even as a commissioner, it's MY art, MY character. not the character or art of anyone else.


Let me make a suggestion, because I wonder how you or other would feel. What if community-added tags weren't directly shown on the submission, but required some extra clicks to see? The submitter-chosen tags would still be shown on the submission directly, but now you're not directly associated with what else the community has chosen.

it shouldn't be there in the first place, the community tagging. That's the point. It gives too much power to non-CCs.

weykent
08-18-2015, 02:15 PM
THIS a thousand times this. Even as a commissioner, it's MY art, MY character. not the character or art of anyone else.

it shouldn't be there in the first place, the community tagging. That's the point. It gives too much power to non-CCs.

I thought you weren't going to reply to me. :)

Anyway, I think we all understand now that your objection to community tagging is that you feel you don't have enough control. Feel free to reply if you have new content to add to the thread, or if you want to answer the questions you've been asked.

Swanda
08-18-2015, 02:28 PM
This is the current behavior, yes. There are no hidden tags, so the current behavior in that situation is not defined. Does this make my objection more clear?

The behaviour would be the same, since the Hidden tags would be treated the same by the blocking filter.
The change i’m suggesting, would be that they aren't displayed to viewers, and would be ignored by the search function.
My thought was; If a content creator approval of tags before adding would be put in place, even with an auto accept after x amount of time. It could take hours, days or even week before the tag were applied. This in turn would be a huge setback for the blocking funktion. So by treating unapproved tags as hidden, this would no longer be an issue.

It could in addition be used by content creators to allow tags for the blocking system, they aren’t comfortable having their art associated with. Since it wouldn’t attract people from searches of said tag, nor be displayed with the tag.

weykent
08-18-2015, 02:37 PM
The behaviour would be the same, since the Hidden tags would be treated the same by the blocking filter.
The change i’m suggesting, would be that they aren't displayed to viewers, and would be ignored by the search function.
My thought was; If a content creator approval of tags before adding would be put in place, even with an auto accept after x amount of time. It could take hours, days or even week before the tag were applied. This in turn would be a huge setback for the blocking funktion. So by treating unapproved tags as hidden, this would no longer be an issue.

It could in addition be used by content creators to allow tags for the blocking system, they aren’t comfortable having their art associated with. Since it wouldn’t attract people from searches of said tag, nor be displayed with the tag.

I think I understand what you're saying. My objection is that, since these hidden tags will not be shown to users, it's possible to have two submissions which appear identical in every way, except that one will be blocked and the other will not, if the submission has a hidden tag.

blufawx
08-18-2015, 02:43 PM
Feel free to reply if you have new content to add to the thread, or if you want to answer the questions you've been asked.


Ah, but i thought you weren't trying to silence anyone?

Well, so much for that lie eh?

I'm not the only one who thinks this, yet you're so fixated on me. Hmmm...I wonder why

Amber-Aria
08-18-2015, 03:03 PM
After reading everything here, I think I'll offer my own two cents.

I'm an artist who has generally has been very supportive of the current tag system on Weasyl, both as a way to find art and blacklist it, and I personally have not experienced any form of tag abuse on my work. Certainly it still needs a lot of work, as there have been many good points brought up about what problems could arise from community tagging, as well as potential solutions. I just wanna put my voice out there for the ideas that I thought sounded good!

I'm on board with an idea like Webster's, where a system could mark responsible "trusted" taggers by their reputation of approved to rejected tags, and restrict those who may be a bit more irresponsible or malicious to always requiring their tags to be approved.

For those artists worried about certain questionable terms being added to their own work (eg. futa, hermaphrodite), I think it's very important that there be a list of "questionable / restricted" tags that only submitters are allowed to add to their own work, if they are comfortable with using those terms to describe their work. I think this would likely help a lot with those artists who would rather avoid certain terms they consider inappropriate.

I also agree with Fiz that it would likely help a lot that if a tag is added to a submission and it is removed, it wouldn't be allowed to be added again except by the uploader or a staff member.

I also wouldn't mind a clearer divide between artist and community tags. While the colour difference is there currently to mark which types of tags there are, I feel like there is still a lot of worry that all the tags will be associated with the submitter's work and will, since they're all mixed together, resulting in an instance that Bloodhound outlined where a content creator may be mistaken for being open to creating certain content, when in reality they simply haven't gotten around to removing them, and would rather keep their distance. Having two separate categories entirely, with "Artist's/Submitter's Tags" on top and brightly coloured as they currently are, and "Community Tags" underneath and more muted would be ideal I think. I do like weykent's idea of possibly making community tags a bit hidden somehow, or at least giving the artist's given tags far more priority and visibility.


Other than what's been mentioned, I think the following ideas are needed in order to improve the tagging system:


Blacklisting by username
Tag suggestions and tag completion to help encourage standard tagging and consistent spelling
Tag implication/relationships to reduce tagging clutter and eliminate the need to add redundant tags (and to improve blacklisting. If I blacklist "egg_laying", it should also blacklist "oviposition", and so on)
Options to include titles and/or descriptions in search results as well as tags. (As an option, please not automatic, because I've found it VERY annoying to try and search on DeviantART because of a single instance of a word in an otherwise completely unrelated description)
The option to go to an actual search page that can be clicked to, with the drop-down menus and checkboxes you get for more specific search help, rather than having to input something into the search bar first to get to that search page. Personal pet peeve, but I'd find it more helpful to be able to get to that page in the first place to set up my search properly the first time around! :c


That's about all I have to say on the situation, and I just want to thank Weasyl staff for opening up discussion on how the tagging system could be improved!

weykent
08-18-2015, 03:13 PM
Thank you for your input! Just a couple of quick notes.


Options to include titles and/or descriptions in search results as well as tags. (As an option, please not automatic, because I've found it VERY annoying to try and search on DeviantART because of a single instance of a word in an otherwise completely unrelated description)

Fulltext indexing is hard, so if this is ever implemented, it will be a long way out. I'm overall undecided, but not a huge fan of this idea. It seems like it's more of a crutch than anything else, unless you have to specifically mark parts of your search query as 'in title' or 'in description'. That might be useful, if someone is trying to recall some submission they saw previously, but it's unfortunately under-tagged. :)


The option to go to an actual search page that can be clicked to, with the drop-down menus and checkboxes you get for more specific search help, rather than having to input something into the search bar first to get to that search page. Personal pet peeve, but I'd find it more helpful to be able to get to that page in the first place to set up my search properly the first time around! :c

Yes, this is definitely terrible and should be fixed. I can't give an ETA, but this is something that I personally want to see done.

Noxid
08-18-2015, 03:15 PM
I think restricted tags is an interesting idea, but my concern is how do you decide what should or shouldn't go on the list?
I mean, it's somewhat of a cultural thing and what may be offensive to some might seem innocuous to others. And as well, the contents of the list would need to be a living document as new terms arise or even existing words take on new meanings (for example, saying something is "gay" in 1920 probably carried a lot different weight than it does today) (I know that's a really dated example but I hope the intent is clear)

Matt
08-18-2015, 03:39 PM
Ah, but i thought you weren't trying to silence anyone?

Well, so much for that lie eh?

I'm not the only one who thinks this, yet you're so fixated on me. Hmmm...I wonder why
We certainly don't want to give the impression that we are attempting to silence you. As you can see, you're still posting. What we're meaning to say is that your impressions and suggestions have been made clear to all of staff multiple times over. As it stands, there's just not much we can say in reply without anything new to reply to.

I hope you understand. Thank you again for your input.

Amber-Aria
08-18-2015, 04:02 PM
Fulltext indexing is hard, so if this is ever implemented, it will be a long way out. I'm overall undecided, but not a huge fan of this idea. It seems like it's more of a crutch than anything else, unless you have to specifically mark parts of your search query as 'in title' or 'in description'. That might be useful, if someone is trying to recall some submission they saw previously, but it's unfortunately under-tagged. :)

Aaaah, okay! I'm not terribly familiar with how hard stuff would actually be to implement, but I think being able to mark part of the search query somehow, like how you said with 'in title' and such would be quite useful, if it was possible to do. Thank you for considering it, even if you're not a fan!



Yes, this is definitely terrible and should be fixed. I can't give an ETA, but this is something that I personally want to see done.

Thank GOODNESS. I'm really glad to hear this.


I think restricted tags is an interesting idea, but my concern is how do you decide what should or shouldn't go on the list?
I mean, it's somewhat of a cultural thing and what may be offensive to some might seem innocuous to others. And as well, the contents of the list would need to be a living document as new terms arise or even existing words take on new meanings (for example, saying something is "gay" in 1920 probably carried a lot different weight than it does today) (I know that's a really dated example but I hope the intent is clear)

Yeah, that's the sticky part... It's a terribly subjective thing, and what some people may consider awful slurs, others may be perfectly okay with using for themselves and their work, and new words are bound to appear over time. But I really do think it'd be worth the effort to at least try to restrict the absolute worst ones that have obviously caused the most discomfort and divide in the community. :c Gender-related terms are the ones I see the most hotly debated, and the ones that I've had friends the most worried about abuse happening to, so maybe only the submitters can define tags related to the genders of the characters involved in a work? I'm mostly throwing ideas out right now, but I do think it's worth consideration.

blufawx
08-18-2015, 04:40 PM
I guess the only real option at the moment is to add at the bottom of a created content post:


**anyone adding tags will have the tags deleted and the user will be blocked. this is my content, not yours.**

From now on.

My question to the staff is why wasn't there an option to opt out of community tags from the launch of this site? Obviously, you knew this was going to be an issue that was raised eventually, right?

I mean the reason SoFurry and Furaffinity don't have this problem is because they don't allow the 'community' to add tags.

(and here comes the patronizing response that is an attempt to shut me down (but "not really") in 3..2..1..)

Socks the Fox
08-18-2015, 05:06 PM
pthnrgrrl I'm gonna state this bluntly, as a normal non-staff user, you're coming across as screaming and stamping your feet until you get your way. You've offered no potential for compromise which is not good for a discussion. You're seeing persecution where there is merely sane discussion. So please, tell us. We know your position on this issue, what compromises are you willing to make to it for the betterment of everyone, not just yourself?

blufawx
08-18-2015, 05:14 PM
We know your position on this issue, what compromises are you willing to make to it for the betterment of everyone, not just yourself?

This shouldn't have been implemented in the first place as it gives too much power to the non-artist, non-writer, non-content creator.

Thus, I did what I had to do for me and for other content creators. There should have been an opt-in on sign up and since there wasn't, there should be an opt-out now.

So I don't see the need for compromise. And I'm not the only one grumbling, I'm just the only one that continues to grumble. There's a difference dear.

Swanda
08-18-2015, 05:34 PM
pthnrgrrl - Your stance on the matter have been heard and fully understood. There is No reason to spam what is essentially the exact same post continuously. It is not adding anything to the discussion. At this point the only thing you're contributing with is rudeness and baseless attacks on the staff.

weykent
08-18-2015, 05:41 PM
I think restricted tags is an interesting idea, but my concern is how do you decide what should or shouldn't go on the list?
I mean, it's somewhat of a cultural thing and what may be offensive to some might seem innocuous to others. And as well, the contents of the list would need to be a living document as new terms arise or even existing words take on new meanings (for example, saying something is "gay" in 1920 probably carried a lot different weight than it does today) (I know that's a really dated example but I hope the intent is clear)


Yeah, that's the sticky part... It's a terribly subjective thing, and what some people may consider awful slurs, others may be perfectly okay with using for themselves and their work, and new words are bound to appear over time. But I really do think it'd be worth the effort to at least try to restrict the absolute worst ones that have obviously caused the most discomfort and divide in the community. :c Gender-related terms are the ones I see the most hotly debated, and the ones that I've had friends the most worried about abuse happening to, so maybe only the submitters can define tags related to the genders of the characters involved in a work? I'm mostly throwing ideas out right now, but I do think it's worth consideration.

I do think this is a good idea, but I definitely agree that choosing which tags get this treatment is a careful balancing act. I don't want to speak for the rest of staff here, but IIRC the general idea was that it would be only staff maintaining the list, it would be updated as necessary, and that it would be primarily, if not entirely, limited to words that have to do with gender identity or are widely understood to be slurs.

Ketsuban
08-18-2015, 06:46 PM
I can't help but wonder if this is a knee-jerk reaction to PurpleKecleon pulling their art from e621 because the site used their “tag what you see” policy as a defence when PK complained about people persistently misgendering their characters. (That was annoying to word because there are two “they” referents. My kingdom for a proximate/obviative distinction in English!)

If you're interested in protecting artist's rights and control of their work, perhaps you could do something about the fact the design of the site doesn't reflect “by you or for you”—It still asserts on both the front page and the submission page that whoever uploaded a thing created it as well, rather than saying “uploaded by” and providing the uploader uploaders the option of specifying the original creator and source. (Taking that to its logical conclusion, I question the utility of “collections” since as it stands you can only collect a work uploaded by someone else on Weasyl. Something uploaded for you on FA or InkBunny? Too bad, better violate their intellectual property rights without even intending to.)

weykent
08-18-2015, 07:07 PM
I can't help but wonder if this is a knee-jerk reaction to PurpleKecleon pulling their art from e621 because the site used their “tag what you see” policy as a defence when PK complained about people persistently misgendering their characters.

Considering this is the first time I've heard of that, I don't think it's the case. :)


If you're interested in protecting artist's rights and control of their work, perhaps you could do something about the fact the design of the site doesn't reflect “by you or for you”—It still asserts on both the front page and the submission page that whoever uploaded a thing created it as well, rather than saying “uploaded by” and providing the uploader uploaders the option of specifying the original creator and source. (Taking that to its logical conclusion, I question the utility of “collections” since as it stands you can only collect a work uploaded by someone else on Weasyl. Something uploaded for you on FA or InkBunny? Too bad, better violate their intellectual property rights without even intending to.)

You mean just that it says "by {user}" without specifying "uploaded by {user}"? There's definitely a lot of things that could/should change around attribution. "Upload works for you/by you" is kind of a cheap hack in lieu of proper attribution. Collections, as well, could use some work.

There are certainly a lot of things across the entire site which could use work, but right now, I think tags are the primary focus.

Bornes
08-18-2015, 07:13 PM
I have read this entire thread in full and I think the staff is going to decide what's best based on all the suggestions and compromises presented.

However something that hasn't been mentioned yet that I would like to see implemented is, users who tag stuff remain anonymous to the content creator.

No matter what weasyl does, some artists are not going to like community tagging. Creators may complain about non CCs having too much power over their work via tagging, but if this site's mission is to have Community tagging, and artists continually block taggers just for helping tag, then that's going to make community tagging crash and burn faster than it already is.

I like community tagging, I like a lot of things about this site, and someone mentioned earlier about how a lot of people's complaints can be attributed to "culture shock." I think that person is absolutely right that this is what is happening.

Mods should know the identity of taggers and if someone is serial tagging a creator's work, the creator can report that and the mod can figure it out. But I, personally, do not want to be essentially banned from seeing someone's work just because I had the audacity to help publicize it by (what I thought was) a helpful tag.

What do you even do in that situation? There's not really a way to defend yourself aside from just being scared off from tagging anything ever again. Which is what appears to be the case, when you look at the stats one of the mods posted about how many users there are and how precious few of them have bothered to tag something that wasn't their's.

I myself can only remember adding a tag to one image /ever/.

Edited to add:
Weasyl is supposed to be an art community. It seems to me community tagging is a way to make that happen. Almost every content creator here that is firmly against community tagging seems to think "Well I'm here and I'm more important because I'm a content creator, so I do what I want."
What weasyl needs to decide is if that statement is actually true. And if it isn't, then we need to discourage these content creators who destroy the culture Weasyl is going for from being active (or even joining) the site.

If someone wants to post art and have full control over it down to tagging, which to me is pretty innocuous, then maybe they shouldn't be posting on Weasyl. This is not the site for them and that's fine. I thought a community was supposed to have many people on equal standing, not content creators on a pedastal and non-CCs sitting around having to be thankful there are any CCs at all.

But this also goes into Weasyl's problems with advertising. You have only advertised to furries, yet you remain steadfast that this is a general art site. I am willing to bet more non-furry artists wouldn't feel as power-hungry over their tags. If weasyl would advertise to non-furries and get a more even distribution of CCs that are furry vs. non-furry, we might be less divided on this issue as a whole.

Bloodhound
08-18-2015, 07:21 PM
First, thank you for your post on the subject. I think you bring up some interesting points! :)

Let me make a suggestion, because I wonder how you or other would feel. What if community-added tags weren't directly shown on the submission, but required some extra clicks to see? The submitter-chosen tags would still be shown on the submission directly, but now you're not directly associated with what else the community has chosen.

I don't think I'm following, exactly... Could you explain it step-by-step, and who sees what? Feel free to use my example with vore and TinyFurry, if that'll help!

weykent
08-18-2015, 07:27 PM
I don't think I'm following, exactly... Could you explain it step-by-step, and who sees what? Feel free to use my example with vore and TinyFurry, if that'll help!

TinyFurry adds the "vore" tag to one of your submissions.
You get a notification, which you read at some point in the future.
Immediately after the tag is added, people can find and filter your submission using the "vore" tag.
When anyone visits the submission page, the "vore" tag is not shown at all; a user has to click on a "view community-added tags" link or button to see it.


- - - Updated - - -


Weasyl is supposed to be an art community. It seems to me community tagging is a way to make that happen. Almost every content creator here that is firmly against community tagging seems to think "Well I'm here and I'm more important because I'm a content creator, so I do what I want."
What weasyl needs to decide is if that statement is actually true. And if it isn't, then we need to discourage these content creators who destroy the culture Weasyl is going for from being active (or even joining) the site.

If someone wants to post art and have full control over it down to tagging, which to me is pretty innocuous, then maybe they shouldn't be posting on Weasyl. This is not the site for them and that's fine. I thought a community was supposed to have many people on equal standing, not content creators on a pedastal and non-CCs sitting around having to be thankful there are any CCs at all.

This is really well said. I definitely couldn't speak for the whole staff on where the site as a whole will end up on this statement. But, in the end, it's impossible to please everyone, and it's foolish to try.

- - - Updated - - -

P.S. I love the idea of making tag edits anonymous to non-staff.

Bloodhound
08-18-2015, 08:10 PM
TinyFurry adds the "vore" tag to one of your submissions.
You get a notification, which you read at some point in the future.
Immediately after the tag is added, people can find and filter your submission using the "vore" tag.
When anyone visits the submission page, the "vore" tag is not shown at all; a user has to click on a "view community-added tags" link or button to see it.



That would be a good implementation! I mean, personally I would still rather see the original uploader have to approve tags as they come in, but this is a good middle-ground. If the CC comes in hours or days later, they can still delete the tag... but at least they know it's not automatically visible on their submission.

Here's a question: Is it possible to 'hide' user-added tags? For example, if TinyFur adds the vore tag to my submission, it will show up in searches or get snared by the tag-blocker (and I would get a notification that it was added), but is never visible on the submission itself (regardless of extra clicking). Is that something that could, conceivably, be done? If so, add it to your pile for the staffers and coders to toss around.

blufawx
08-18-2015, 08:21 PM
We need to discourage these content creators who destroy the culture Weasyl is going for from being active (or even joining) the site.

thank you. this and

If someone wants to post art and have full control over it down to tagging, which to me is pretty innocuous, then maybe they shouldn't be posting on Weasyl. This is not the site for them and that's fine. I thought a community was supposed to have many people on equal standing, not content creators on a pedastal and non-CCs sitting around having to be thankful there are any CCs at all. [/QUOTE]


Are why I'll be deleting my Weasyl and telling people not to come to this site.

You've just proven that non-creators want all the control, get it and are not held on equal footing to CCs.

Which is the problem.

Did you pay for my art? No
Did you pay for the time I take to color it? No.

So why should you get to dictate any additional tags? Because it's a "community" ? that's hogwash. the community didn't make the art, I did.

- - - Updated - - -


P.S. I love the idea of making tag edits anonymous to non-staff

of course you do. gives more power to the viewers and none to the creators.

Socks the Fox
08-18-2015, 08:34 PM
Personally I think that a decent middle ground would be this:
Tag-what-you-know based tagging. If an artist says it's not vore, don't tag it as such even if it kind of looks like it.
CC controlled per-submission tag blacklists. If a CC doesn't want someone tagging their work with vore, they can tag it with say -vore and nobody would be allowed to tag it that way (and would otherwise behave as though the tag didn't exist)
CC controlled per-submission tagging opt-out. If this is enabled, their submission would only ever show up in their gallery and people's favorites. It would not appear on the front page, it would not appear in critique (even if flagged for it), and it would not appear in search.

The options would have to be set on a per-submission basis, the blacklists because it's submission specific and the opt-out because a CC might want certain submissions to be available to search.

I would advise against account-wide versions of these options to dissuade their use.

blufawx
08-18-2015, 08:37 PM
CC controlled per-submission tagging opt-out

Why only a per submission?

What's wrong with a tagging opt-out period?

It'd be a waste of time and CC energy to have to go in per submission and say "yes tag this, no don't tag that". just make it system wide.

- - - Updated - - -


This is where I stand. I had a lot of hope for Weasyl, but unless they let artists disallow community tagging, I will be staying with FA until it burns to the ground, and only keep Weasyl as a tiny side gallery.

Random people don't get to mislabel MY ART. It's mine, I own the rights to it. I shouldn't have to undertake a bunch of extra steps just to get it displayed correctly.


DodgerGreywing over in this thread (https://forums.weasyl.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?7562-Artists-reactions-to-tagging-have-become-ridiculous/page5) agrees with me

BlueJaySF
08-18-2015, 08:43 PM
Anonymizing the identity of community taggers save to the staff may require an extra step on the uploader's part in contacting a staffer, but that's hardly any different than having to block the community tagger on the creator's own or otherwise discourage them from tagging the uploads.

A setup allowing uploaders to either accept or decline community tags proposed to their submissions (per tag and per submission), which still anonymizes the community tagger's identity, is a reasonable compromise for both sides: it prevents mistagging and potential abuse but allows the uploader to be given greater exposure to potential fans and clients and can more accurately label a work. Obviously neither side is infallible so a system wherein individual tags from a community tagger can be accepted or rejected per submission would accomplish a lot for both parties for a variety of reasons.

Having an option to auto-reject all proposed tags by all community members on all uploads on that system would satisfy the desires of some users to prevent incorrect tagging, be it malicious or simply from someone mistaken in their attempts to help define an upload.

Of course, this kind of tagging system overhaul would likely only happen if Weasyl ever moved past beta stage, so for now it's a pipe dream.

Bornes
08-18-2015, 09:16 PM
thank you. this and


If someone wants to post art and have full control over it down to tagging, which to me is pretty innocuous, then maybe they shouldn't be posting on Weasyl. This is not the site for them and that's fine. I thought a community was supposed to have many people on equal standing, not content creators on a pedastal and non-CCs sitting around having to be thankful there are any CCs at all.


Are why I'll be deleting my Weasyl and telling people not to come to this site.

You've just proven that non-creators want all the control, get it and are not held on equal footing to CCs.

Which is the problem.

Did you pay for my art? No
Did you pay for the time I take to color it? No.

So why should you get to dictate any additional tags? Because it's a "community" ? that's hogwash. the community didn't make the art, I did.

- - - Updated - - -



of course you do. gives more power to the viewers and none to the creators.

I fail to see how tagging creations is "all the power."
You have the power to create (or not create) your art.
You have the power to block users for no reason at all if you feel like it, and prevent those users from contacting you in any way.
You have the power to upload (or not upload) your art here.

You have made it abundantly clear throughout this entire thread that you hate this site. Well I'm not sorry to tell you that this site is not here to conform to you. This site was made specifically as a community. From Weaysl's own about page:

Weasyl is a social gallery website designed for artists, writers, musicians, and more to share their work with other artists and fans. We seek to bring the creative world together in one easy to use, friendly, community website.

Putting art here and then demanding the community has nothing to do with it is not very social. Weasyl is NOT an image storage site. It is a community-driven site, with community-driven ideals, run in a way they want it to run, which at this moment, is community-driven.

Not having community tags is not community driven. Weasyl staff has made it quite clear that community tagging is also not going to go away. So we need to come up with a compromise. Of community tagging being here, but also not stepping on too many toes. But in doing this, not taking it completely away.

This site is give and take for CCs and non alike. Why do people post art on websites like Weasyl? To get more coverage, to get people see, fave, and comment the art. On Weasyl, the primary way this is done is through tagging. If you don't want your art to be seen, favorited, and commented by anybody, go to dropbox, imgur, or photobucket and create a private account.

This site doesn't fit your functions-- that's fine. This site is not for you. That doesn't make it a bad site. It just make it a site that you don't mesh well with. Much like you probably wouldn't join facebook if you weren't interested in having a network of friends, you shouldn't be on Weasyl if you're not interested in the community aspects of the site.

Matt
08-18-2015, 09:20 PM
Personally I think that a decent middle ground would be this:
Tag-what-you-know based tagging. If an artist says it's not vore, don't tag it as such even if it kind of looks like it.
CC controlled per-submission tag blacklists. If a CC doesn't want someone tagging their work with vore, they can tag it with say -vore and nobody would be allowed to tag it that way (and would otherwise behave as though the tag didn't exist)
CC controlled per-submission tagging opt-out. If this is enabled, their submission would only ever show up in their gallery and people's favorites. It would not appear on the front page, it would not appear in critique (even if flagged for it), and it would not appear in search.

The options would have to be set on a per-submission basis, the blacklists because it's submission specific and the opt-out because a CC might want certain submissions to be available to search.

I would advise against account-wide versions of these options to dissuade their use.
I'm a big fan of everything you've laid out here.

Moogle
08-18-2015, 09:28 PM
This site doesn't fit your functions-- that's fine. This site is not for you. That doesn't make it a bad site. It just make it a site that you don't mesh well with. Much like you probably wouldn't join facebook if you weren't interested in having a network of friends, you shouldn't be on Weasyl if you're not interested in the community aspects of the site.

Yesyesyes, so well said. I'd 'this' your whole post 100 times over if I could. ;)

blufawx
08-18-2015, 09:30 PM
You have made it abundantly clear throughout this entire thread that you hate this site.


at no point in time did I say I hate the site

Do I dislike features? Yes. I dislike that I have to keep 2 separate formats of my writings on my PC every time I update it because Weasyl doesn't want .docx or at least .rtf. I dislike that the 'community' has the power to tag my art as they see fit.

but that doesn't mean that i hate the site. how dare you put words into my mouth.

blufawx
08-18-2015, 09:45 PM
You are highly flippant towards staff though.

Only one staff that got flippant towards me first.

again, doesn't mean I hate the staff.

but i can't stop people from thinking erroneous things now can I?

Sybil
08-18-2015, 10:03 PM
Not here to join in discussion or debate about this (nothing against the users, keep doing you), I want to put my opinion to the staff here though.
The community tagging feature, in its current form, is the reason I don't use Weasyl at all. I am sad to admit this, as I do really love this site and respect the admins/mods and their work, but the system has flaws I can't really get past. In my short time posting to the main site, I did face a notable amount of tagging abuse, and users I did not know and had no prior history with would engage in "edit wars" with me. (I understand that blocked users cannot edit tags anymore? That's a great step in the right direction)
There's the additional issue with inaccurate tagging, which while I can agree with the notion that community tagging enables better filtering and availability to the audience, can still poorly or inappropriately label an image, especially when tagging for genitalia or gender identity. Obviously, there are effective ways to combat this particular issue without large site revisions simply with guidelines, cautionary notes in the image description, etc. However, a really good way to bypass this issue, I think, is with the suggestion by Socks the Fox: "If a CC doesn't want someone tagging their work with vore, they can tag it with say -vore and nobody would be allowed to tag it that way (and would otherwise behave as though the tag didn't exist)"
Honestly, I agree with all of what Socks the Fox said. I do admit I would like an option to opt-out of community tagging account-wide (I strongly prefer to be the only one tagging my art), but an option for specific images, or even specific tags, would be perfect in my eyes.

Thank you guys so much for putting this issue on the table. I have wanted to come back to Weasyl for a long time and likely will jump back into the party when your community tagging system is revised :)

MitsukiJuran
08-19-2015, 12:02 AM
Considering this hurts a lot of trans people who are being misgendered in tags (or being tagged as slurs!) there should be an option to disable tags from people who aren't friends.

blufawx
08-19-2015, 12:11 AM
Considering this hurts a lot of trans people who are being misgendered in tags (or being tagged as slurs!) there should be an option to disable tags from people who aren't friends.

Now there'd be a compromise I could see happening. it makes sense to me.

Webster
08-19-2015, 12:46 AM
So I read up since my last post and thought about it some more in the shower. I have two (more) thoughts on the matter, one leading into the other. Note that some of this involves descriptions of erotic art.

Part 1:

What about a policy for community tagging of, instead of "Tag what you see" or "Tag what you know", "Tag what it is"?

What I mean by this is add tags for, for example, "penis", "scrotum", "labia", "breasts", instead of "male", "female", "hermaphrodite". Leave gender up to what the CC chose. Another example would be to tag "spots" or "stripes" and leave the species up to the CC. The biggest problem I've read so far (please add other experiences if you have any!) is that of improperly labeling gender, which is tricky because gender is not necessarily related to visible, physical attributes. Saying "tag what you see" is annoyingly vague in that context, and you wind up with: "I see a futa!" "Well no it's a transgender person" "But that's not what I see!" "Futa means hermaphrodite, you don't see labia!" and so on. Another example would be to tag "crotch bulge" or "cleavage" and leave it to the artist to determine what the sex/gender of the character is, or (Is it a penis or big labia in the underwear? Is it an intersex person or a guy with really huge pecs?)

"Tag what it is" would be a stricter subset, locked to the context that this is an art (visual, writing, musical, etc, all kinds of art) site, and that the art is an expression of the artist, but it's also a community art site, designed to help build up a community around that art. I'm an artist. I'm also a viewer of art by other people. In both contexts, despite feeling there are both pros and cons to community tagging, it's a feature I want. In a perfect world, artists would tag every piece correctly the first time but unfortunately that doesn't happen. Community tagging is a feature to help artists too, not just those appreciating art.


Part 2:

"Tag what it is" leads into a bigger problem, though. It's half related to this debate, half not. That's the idea of grouping. If you have a picture with two or more characters, and you follow the "tag what it is" philosophy, in a picture you might wind up with a cis-male character and cis-female character. So the image would be tagged "penis, scrotum, breasts, labia". If the artist does not tag the individual genders, you can't search for works involving cis-men and cis-women, but exclude intersex characters. And if there are multiple characters that overlap, e.g. a three way between two men and a woman, you can't necessarily search for just ones involving 'straight' sex. You can start tagging orientations of sex, but it gets even more complicated when you're dealing with transgender and nonbinary characters.

One possible implementation is to provide character groupings. For each character, you can create a set of tags. Maybe you have a picture of a man crossdressing with a woman in it. You could search for or filter out men in skirts if it was tagged like:

{ male, corset, skirt, high-heel boots }, { female, slacks, dress shirt, dress shoes }, ...
Or maybe you have a picture with an intersex character who is very well endowed with a male character that is average. Some people want to search for that, others are uncomfortable with such things.

{ male, penis, muscles, vest }, { intersex, hyper, big penis, big breasts, nude }, ...
Tall woman but short man? That can be adorable! If you want to search for it, instead of doing tall_muscular_woman or some horrible mashup of tags, you would do:

{ male, short, ... }, { female, tall, ... }, ...
And there you go!

However, I've done web development before, both on the front end and database/back-end. I can think of ways to handle that. I'm not sure I can think of ways to handle that efficiently when you have a large site like Weasyl. On FA (Not sure if there's a count on Weasyl I can find) I've uploaded over 1400 submissions since 2009. FA recently-ish hit 15 million submissions. If Weasyl expects to grow at all it needs to be able to handle such a thing. FA didn't even have a search function for a good chunk of time because search wasn't efficient enough to handle such a high load of searches with such a large amount of content.


Aside:

FA didn't always have keywords like it does now, and it still doesn't have keyword (tag) filtering. So while Weasyl doesn't necessarily need these things to be useful, it certainly is a major differentiator. These are many of the features that make me prefer Weasyl over FA (although I still prefer some of InkBunny's features over Weasyl's. Sorry. :3 ). If Weasyl just copies existing sites, what incentive is there for a community to grow on Weasyl? "FA but with folders!" is obviously not enough, as there still are people that refuse to upload to Weasyl, not even in addition to FA. It's not that they won't leave FA, it's that they won't spend the 15 seconds to copy and paste the information from FA's submission upload page to Weasyl's.

Bornes
08-19-2015, 02:59 AM
Bornes, I've been reading your responses and one particular post didn't sit well with me.
I rather don't appreciate your generalization that people upset with the tagging situation are trying to be obtuse and don't understand Weasyl's goal.



Some of us don't appreciate the tagging system and will settle for a compromise, but wouldn't care either way in the grand scheme of things. Someone like me.
Your stance which, in my interpretation, amounts to "don't like it? Fuck off, you don't belong here" is bothersome. It's not "community driven" to just want to brush people to the side or say they need to be quiet because they're not entirely in lockstep with your ideals. Especially if they might actually wish to work with the mods/community in a calm and open manner to develop a decent middle ground. Which might I add, I'm for all of the ideas presented by both staff and the community in this thread. You just assumed everyone unsatisfied is trying to give the community a hard time.

I had my specific reasons for joining Weasyl. I have specific reasons why I'd prefer to have somewhat more or complete control over my tags. Reasons which I've explained privately to the moderation team and eagerly await a response. I make the lowest common denominator of furry work and one glance at my gallery will instantly show you what side of the site I cater to. There are certain sub sections of that audience I'd rather avoid. If I don't get it my way, I'll deal with it. No fuss, no muss.That's great and that's what I was saying-- I'm sure a good compromise would be made (my opinion from the second page has changed since I read more and my last post).

If you read more carefully into my post, I stated:
Almost every content creator here that is firmly against community tagging seems to think "Well I'm here and I'm more important because I'm a content creator, so I do what I want."

I am not talking about creators like you who are looking for (and eager to accept) a compromise. I am only speaking to people who are 100% against the tagging system.

I apologize if it came off as "If you don't like how it is exactly right now, get out."

It was supposed to come off as "If you don't like the idea of community tagging, this site is not for you, because community tagging is not going away."

There is a thread in Site Discussion that I have been watching for quite some time that probably spurred this thread. I think a post made there is extremely relevant and should be restated in this thread:

The real question about who should have full rights over the tags and who shouldn't is this: Is this site meant for artists or not?
If you wanna remove the artists absolute control over tags by standard (and not just after abusing the system) then the answer is No.

Yes this system works fine on many other platforms, but the reality of those platforms also is that they are meant for watchers first and creators second.

It's something we should think about and it's something I mentioned in one of my previous posts but probably din't word it very well.

weykent
08-19-2015, 03:55 AM
<snip>

I love the idea of trees/groups/graphs of tags, but it seems like it would be more difficult to establish standards for, and more difficult to specify search queries for. Your suggestion seems to be a pretty okay way to write out the search queries, but how do you specify interactions between groupings? When I was thinking about this in the past, I started thinking about graphical point-and-click query builders that let you build a directed graph that you'd use to search for a similar graph, but that was when I was thinking about directed graphs of tags and not just groups.

- - - Updated - - -


That would be a good implementation! I mean, personally I would still rather see the original uploader have to approve tags as they come in, but this is a good middle-ground. If the CC comes in hours or days later, they can still delete the tag... but at least they know it's not automatically visible on their submission.

Here's a question: Is it possible to 'hide' user-added tags? For example, if TinyFur adds the vore tag to my submission, it will show up in searches or get snared by the tag-blocker (and I would get a notification that it was added), but is never visible on the submission itself (regardless of extra clicking). Is that something that could, conceivably, be done? If so, add it to your pile for the staffers and coders to toss around.

Anything is possible, and that's even something that wouldn't be hard to implement, but I'm not a fan of hiding that kind of information from users entirely. https://forums.weasyl.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?7738-Community-Tagging-Overview&p=89318&viewfull=1#post89318 is the most detailed explanation I gave of it, I think. You'd be okay with a tag like "vore" being used to find/filter your submissions iff it wasn't user-visible at all?

- - - Updated - - -


Considering this hurts a lot of trans people who are being misgendered in tags (or being tagged as slurs!) there should be an option to disable tags from people who aren't friends.

Another idea being considered is not allowing anyone except the submitter and staff to add gender-related tags. How would you feel about that?

- - - Updated - - -


Anonymizing the identity of community taggers save to the staff may require an extra step on the uploader's part in contacting a staffer, but that's hardly any different than having to block the community tagger on the creator's own or otherwise discourage them from tagging the uploads.

It's quite different. A number of people (in this thread and elsewhere) have expressed the sentiment that "anyone adding tags to my submissions will be blocked", and anonymizing edits prevents this. If someone added abusive tags and the submitter contacted staff, I would think the action taken would be "evaluate if that someone should have their tagging privileges revoked", not "tell the submitter who did it".

Noxid
08-19-2015, 08:26 AM
I think the problem with the "tag what it is" approach you outlined is that one, it doesn't seem to reflect well the way people search (which is important for utility) and it seems to make the tagging process more complicated (which isn't good for artists because it's already hard enough to get them to add good tags)

for example, if I wanted to search for only trans-male characters for some reason, I can't *just* rely on physical characteristics because it could vary - pre, post, no obvious secondary sex characteristics, etc. So this still relies on the submitter to provide or approve the key information, and at that point I don't think the system is much more effective than a "greylist" of sensitive tags proposed previously in the thread.
And as well, like weykent mentioned, the "interactions" between groups is important too. I think a flat tagging scheme is easier for everyone to understand and use as long as the right terms are used to describe the content.

blufawx
08-19-2015, 08:46 AM
Another idea being considered is not allowing anyone except the submitter and staff to add gender-related tags. How would you feel about that?

I don't know that I'd feel comfortable with staff doing anything either, but it's a start on my end.

Bloodhound
08-19-2015, 10:18 AM
Anything is possible, and that's even something that wouldn't be hard to implement, but I'm not a fan of hiding that kind of information from users entirely. https://forums.weasyl.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?7738-Community-Tagging-Overview&p=89318&viewfull=1#post89318 is the most detailed explanation I gave of it, I think. You'd be okay with a tag like "vore" being used to find/filter your submissions iff it wasn't user-visible at all?

It would make me more comfortable with the idea of non-me users being able to add tags, yeah! I like the idea of someone being able to tag-block something of mine they dislike, because I know that's helpful for a lot of people. I'm less of a fan of people being able to tag something of mine as Something That It's Not, especially if it came down to a fetish or idea or whatever that I personally find distasteful. Having a hidden tag would, I think, satisfy both of those ideas.

weykent
08-19-2015, 01:01 PM
It would make me more comfortable with the idea of non-me users being able to add tags, yeah! I like the idea of someone being able to tag-block something of mine they dislike, because I know that's helpful for a lot of people. I'm less of a fan of people being able to tag something of mine as Something That It's Not, especially if it came down to a fetish or idea or whatever that I personally find distasteful. Having a hidden tag would, I think, satisfy both of those ideas.

Just to be clear, my understanding of your post is that this theoretical piece is so questionable/borderline, that while you don't feel it's vore (or else you wouldn't have drawn it), someone else might. Is that correct?

Ikani
08-19-2015, 01:06 PM
Hi guys! Thanks for all the awesome responses!


It would make me more comfortable with the idea of non-me users being able to add tags, yeah! I like the idea of someone being able to tag-block something of mine they dislike, because I know that's helpful for a lot of people. I'm less of a fan of people being able to tag something of mine as Something That It's Not, especially if it came down to a fetish or idea or whatever that I personally find distasteful. Having a hidden tag would, I think, satisfy both of those ideas.

I wanted to respond to this one and see if I can fill in a bit more information as well. I think one of the concerns Weykent has with totally hidden tags, is that user1 filters on that tag and is blocked from viewing, user2 doesn't filter on that tag and can view the submission fine. I think the part that's missing is User1 and User2 are friends. User2 links the piece to User1, who finds themselves blocked, but there's no way for either user to figure out why. That why is what should be satisfied.

Right now, CC tags, staff added tags, and user added tags are in different colors, but grouped together. Personally I think at the very least, these should be separated visibly into their own sections on the submission. Clearly identified as "These are the tags the CC has listed, and should be taken as gospel" and "These are tags the community has suggested, and shouldn't carry as much weight." Possibly even have, as part of the suggested approval process, if a CC approves a tag, it gets promoted to their tag section.

I have seen the argument that community tagging removes some control over the content from the CC. Would comments also count towards that lost control? And if so (and that's an acceptable loss), would classifying community added tags more with the "social weight" of comments help?

Separately, I'm sure there's a discussion to be had on improving comments, including the ability to disable them on a submission. That's outside the scope of this particular thread, but something I'm sure we'll visit. :)

Bloodhound
08-19-2015, 02:09 PM
Just to be clear, my understanding of your post is that this theoretical piece is so questionable/borderline, that while you don't feel it's vore (or else you wouldn't have drawn it), someone else might. Is that correct?

Correct! Although you could swap 'vore' for several other things I, personally, may not be down with... but since this is the example we're going with, etc etc.

If a CC is very uncomfortable with (fill in the blank) and don't want it attributed to their art, it would be very attractive to the CC to know that the (fill in the blank) tag is never going to be visible on their submission, even if someone's added it and someone's found that submission because of the tag. The comfort that comes with being able to separate or distance themselves/their content with (fill in the blank) would make CC's more accepting of community tagging, IMO.


Hi guys! Thanks for all the awesome responses!



I wanted to respond to this one and see if I can fill in a bit more information as well. I think one of the concerns Weykent has with totally hidden tags, is that user1 filters on that tag and is blocked from viewing, user2 doesn't filter on that tag and can view the submission fine. I think the part that's missing is User1 and User2 are friends. User2 links the piece to User1, who finds themselves blocked, but there's no way for either user to figure out why. That why is what should be satisfied.

Right now, CC tags, staff added tags, and user added tags are in different colors, but grouped together. Personally I think at the very least, these should be separated visibly into their own sections on the submission. Clearly identified as "These are the tags the CC has listed, and should be taken as gospel" and "These are tags the community has suggested, and shouldn't carry as much weight." Possibly even have, as part of the suggested approval process, if a CC approves a tag, it gets promoted to their tag section.

I have seen the argument that community tagging removes some control over the content from the CC. Would comments also count towards that lost control? And if so (and that's an acceptable loss), would classifying community added tags more with the "social weight" of comments help?

Separately, I'm sure there's a discussion to be had on improving comments, including the ability to disable them on a submission. That's outside the scope of this particular thread, but something I'm sure we'll visit. :)

As per your first paragraph (I don't know how to chop up the quote to stick my replies in there XD), I think if User1 and User2 have some confusion over why one can see X but the other can't, it wouldn't take a whole lot of discussion to realize one has a tag on that submission blocked. It doesn't seem like it would cause any strife between User1 and User2, and if it was something that happened more than once, the assumption would gradually build (i.e. users would realize more quickly that 'oh, I must have a tag on that piece blocked').

I am glad that the tags are already color-coded, because that helps distinguish right from the get-go that the CC is not necessarily saying their submission contains x, y or z.

Could you explain more what your thought/question is about comments, and the tags having 'social weight' and etc?


Also, I'm pleased that more people are using the CC thing instead of 'artist' now. I feel like such a trend-setter X) Unless someone used it in the thread before I did, then oops!

blufawx
08-19-2015, 02:51 PM
Would comments also count towards that lost control?

The only way it's a loss of control is if I can't delete the comment if say it's hostile or trolling.

Otherwise, I think comments are in a completely different category than tags.

Swanda
08-19-2015, 03:07 PM
Ikani - The big difference between comments and tags is that comments is a commentary on the submission, while tags are Defining the submission. There is a hella big difference between a personal statement of "I think this looks like X" and "This submission is now X"

Socks the Fox
08-19-2015, 03:47 PM
Correct! Although you could swap 'vore' for several other things I, personally, may not be down with... but since this is the example we're going with, etc etc.

If a CC is very uncomfortable with (fill in the blank) and don't want it attributed to their art, it would be very attractive to the CC to know that the (fill in the blank) tag is never going to be visible on their submission, even if someone's added it and someone's found that submission because of the tag. The comfort that comes with being able to separate or distance themselves/their content with (fill in the blank) would make CC's more accepting of community tagging, IMO.

My concern with that is that now those hidden tags can more easily be used to sneakily troll the CC. If they block "weird_fetish" because they find it morally reprehensible (say, tagging back-alley sex stuff with rape even when the CC says that's not what's happening), and someone then goes through all their submissions and tags all their art with "weird_fetish" because they know the CC hates it then how will they know they're now being forcibly associated with something they disagree with?

blufawx
08-19-2015, 05:08 PM
My concern with that is that now those hidden tags can more easily be used to sneakily troll the CC. If they block "weird_fetish" because they find it morally reprehensible (say, tagging back-alley sex stuff with rape even when the CC says that's not what's happening), and someone then goes through all their submissions and tags all their art with "weird_fetish" because they know the CC hates it then how will they know they're now being forcibly associated with something they disagree with?

and now you see why I say there shouldn't be community tagging.

weykent
08-19-2015, 06:42 PM
The only way it's a loss of control is if I can't delete the comment if say it's hostile or trolling.

Otherwise, I think comments are in a completely different category than tags.

What do you perceive the difference between the two to be? You can already remove tags, and in either case you get a notification.

- - - Updated - - -


My concern with that is that now those hidden tags can more easily be used to sneakily troll the CC. If they block "weird_fetish" because they find it morally reprehensible (say, tagging back-alley sex stuff with rape even when the CC says that's not what's happening), and someone then goes through all their submissions and tags all their art with "weird_fetish" because they know the CC hates it then how will they know they're now being forcibly associated with something they disagree with?

I'm not particularly concerned with this sort of thing, because once caught, it's trivial to reverse. It's a very rare occurrence anyway.

Swanda
08-19-2015, 07:09 PM
What do you perceive the difference between the two to be? You can already remove tags, and in either case you get a notification.



Ikani - The big difference between comments and tags is that comments is a commentary on the submission, while tags are Defining the submission. There is a hella big difference between a personal statement of "I think this looks like X" and "This submission is now X"

I'm not really understanding how this is a hard thing to understand?
People are not as upset about people calling something X as they are about getting their submission redefined as X without their consent.

weykent
08-19-2015, 07:10 PM
I'm not really understanding how this is a hard thing to understand?
People are not as upset about people calling something X as they are about getting their submission redefined as X without their consent.

I was hoping for the perspective of someone else in particular.

blufawx
08-19-2015, 08:15 PM
What do you perceive the difference between the two to be? You can already remove tags, and in either case you get a notification

One gives power to people that didn't create the content and can't, nor should be, reading the CC's mind to know what to tag it. Community tagging gives power to people that have no business having that power while diminishing the importance of the CC.

Comments are commentary, unimportant things that generally mean nothing beyond a person seeing the art, saying they like it or dislike it or calling your mother fat.

Bloodhound
08-19-2015, 09:02 PM
My concern with that is that now those hidden tags can more easily be used to sneakily troll the CC. If they block "weird_fetish" because they find it morally reprehensible (say, tagging back-alley sex stuff with rape even when the CC says that's not what's happening), and someone then goes through all their submissions and tags all their art with "weird_fetish" because they know the CC hates it then how will they know they're now being forcibly associated with something they disagree with?

They would know because they would still be receiving notifications that 'so-and-so added the tag xyz' to their submission. The CC would still have the option to delete it, and it had remained hidden before that, so that should make them feel safer :)

Socks the Fox
08-19-2015, 10:35 PM
Ah, I guess I missed that part.

Oly
08-20-2015, 04:47 AM
I seriously fail to see how people being able to tag stuff or even suggest tags for stuff is the creator ceding power. It doesn't change what's there. It doesn't change what the creator says or doesn't say about it.

Yes there's a potential for trolling if tags don't need to be approved first, and we've seen that it's barely been exploited and the staff are on top of it. And the submitter still has power because it's still their submission. There ALWAYS a potential for trolling, everywhere, all the time. I don't see how this is exceptional.

And anyway, I agree that there shouldn't be a difference between creators and consumers. I've never thought so. I'm both and I encourage everyone to be both. Meh.

NOW ALL THAT SAID: I like the tagging like it is but I'm not invested in it staying just like it is. There's been some really sick ideas in this thread and I think the best one stands out for me as being able to set tagging to friends only. So regardless of my thoughts I do hope we can see some solid progress here soon!

snowhawk
08-20-2015, 06:25 AM
So, having read through this thread, and being a user who left because of community tagging and having my previous work tagged with a LOT of things I don't agree with (I seriously had 3 images that weren't actually general rated (I rated other images higher since they were for a comic project and the project as a whole is not general), and two of those were the only ones that had any changes, even when the third was basically the same type of pin-up as one of the others) and not being able to see who I should block pissing me off... I have a few things to say on the matter.

First: I prefer the LiveJournal/Dreamwidth (and a few other sites) version of tagging, with tags separated not with spaces, but with commas. (So: tag 1, tag 2, tag 3, etc). This is what I have found working best. I tag MORE when I can just hit a single key, be it a comma or return/tab, but I have the ability to tag multiple words in a single tag. And I generally don't tag if it's anything more complex than that.

Most of my tags on my Tumblr? Placed on mobile client, despite my previously awful wi-fi connection, because I just hit return.

Also, on LJ/DW, I can just copy/paste a string of tags, which was useful when I was posting my novel's chapters. And tag suggestions area thing there as well, though this is only based off what I've previously used, or what the community allows if I'm posting to a community and they have restricted tags.

I can even copy/paste strings of tag on the SL Marketplace, as well as the PrimBay site.

Furiffic and SoFurry both have suggested tags that pop up when I start typing. I honestly like Furiffic's tagging system, as it has not only system tags (such as for species), but there's also an area where you can add up to 20 user defined tags. Tags can be multiple words, separated by spaces, but are entered with the Tab key.

One of my issues with the current tagging system, beyond feeling like I'm losing creative control, is that the search/blacklist system is apparently so broken that is doesn't understand partial words. When I search for "cat," any result that contains the word "cat" or has "cat" in the supplied tags (and it should extend to the description/title as well, though I see that was already touched on) should be returned by any decent search engine. If I want to search for small or cute horse art, but not MLP, I should be able to put in something like "pony -my -little."

These are basic things I've been doing for years with web searches, so why isn't it being used?

Is your search/blacklist system so broken that someone felt the need to tag an erotic image with "porn," "porno," and "pornography" when "porn" should have been enough? Same with it getting tagged "erotic" and "erotica." Again, this relates to the "cat" above.

Sure, if I search for "cat" and results returned are including things that are tagged with "World of Warcraft: Cataclysm", those aren't -related-, but it means that the search is at least doing it's job, because cat.

On that same image, which was rated as 18+, this person tagged it "nsfw" and "explicit." ... Duh? It's rated 18+, with the Weaysl definition for such images because it wasn't violent or gory. Additional tags on that image were: "anus," "breasts," "masturbation," "naked," "nude," "pussy," "smut," and "vagina." ONE of those tags (the masturbation tag) would have been welcomed, as I forgot to add it when I was uploading older art. Nothing else was necessary. The one other that could have been added, and wasn't? Something like "mare" as the character was a female horse.

I discovered that soon after seeing a thread with a site staff member who has been repeatedly responding in this thread use the smallest amount of PR I have seen outside of a corporation of scam furry artist responding to people who were concerned about a user abusing their community tagging privileges. (By the looks of things, that staff member's PR skills are still lacking... Arguing with users, even the abrasive ones? Really?)

Between that and there being a useless "History" link under the tags, and having NEVER gotten any kind of notification about these tags having been added... (So if there was, it's a more recent feature than those tags going onto that image, which I don't even know when that was because the History link was broken for it) I pulled my work and decided to just stick with FA until it finally sinks. I even made use of my ancient InkBunny account, which should say something about how frustrated it made me when you look at the types of content still allowed there.

I sent an email to the general staff email, and it took sending a poke over Twitter to get any kind of response. (I've come to expect that of FA, but really guys?) So I'm saying a lot of the same things in this post.

I like the idea of "If you disable community tagging, your art doesn't show up in search/browsing by users who have things blacklisted." That's fine. The old art I had posted I wasn't as concerned with people finding (and the picture that received all the tags was about 4 years old, posted mainly for historic purposes), but my webcomic? Yeah, I'd like to have more exposure on it, so sure, I'll tag it. Old drawing of my character sitting on a character from an anime I watched at that time, not concerned. But just because her butt was fairly large in that picture, I don't want fetishy tags on it (hypothetical situation, as far as I know anyway).

Would I possibly lose exposure for the lack of wanting my old Gundam Wing fan art tagged by the community? Maybe. But if that's what is going to draw someone in, then I have a lot of bad news for them...

I like the idea of "tag what you KNOW" instead of "tag what you see." If you see a commissioned piece on someone's gallery, and you know, from the creator, the character is, say, a vampire, then sure, put that into the suggestion box. But if you see a character with long canine teeth, you shouldn't go "vampire" and add that if you don't know. If you don't know a character's gender with 100% certainty, then it shouldn't be added.

Overall: I stand by the thought that if you want community tagging on what is first and foremost a site for artists (and writers, crafters, and the like), then it needs to be approved by those content creators. You can't compare a gallery like this to a sharing site like e621, it's apples and oranges.

There, I'm done. Enjoy my fibro-fogged brain tl;dring all over this thread.

weykent
08-20-2015, 06:48 AM
On that same image, which was rated as 18+, this person tagged it "nsfw" and "explicit." ... Duh? It's rated 18+, with the Weaysl definition for such images because it wasn't violent or gory. Additional tags on that image were: "anus," "breasts," "masturbation," "naked," "nude," "pussy," "smut," and "vagina." ONE of those tags (the masturbation tag) would have been welcomed, as I forgot to add it when I was uploading older art. Nothing else was necessary. The one other that could have been added, and wasn't? Something like "mare" as the character was a female horse.

Without having seen the submission in question, can you explain why you felt that e.g. "anus", "breasts", "vagina" were inappropriate? Were these not visible in the submission? (Remember that the "female" tag can't necessarily imply any of these other tags.)


Between that and there being a useless "History" link under the tags, and having NEVER gotten any kind of notification about these tags having been added... (So if there was, it's a more recent feature than those tags going onto that image, which I don't even know when that was because the History link was broken for it)

Tag history started being recorded around February 2014, and submissions posted before then won't have any history of modifications before then listed. Modifications since then, even on old submissions, would be listed. It was at the same time (i.e. February 2014) that tag modification notifications started being sent out.

taasla
08-20-2015, 08:11 AM
Ah, but i thought you weren't trying to silence anyone?

Well, so much for that lie eh?

I'm not the only one who thinks this, yet you're so fixated on me. Hmmm...I wonder why

Wow a+ pr response by the staff. So really this thread is less about giving a hoot about what cc creators would like. (Let me turn it off. Like sofurry) it's more to just defend why it's not changing. Okay. Well that's made my decision for me. Too bad I can't get my donation back.

Fiz
08-20-2015, 08:40 AM
Wow a+ pr response by the staff. So really this thread is less about giving a hoot about what cc creators would like. (Let me turn it off. Like sofurry) it's more to just defend why it's not changing. Okay. Well that's made my decision for me. Too bad I can't get my donation back.

I'm not sure where you're seeing "we're not changing it" from? Yes, we intend to keep community tagging as a core idea but we're trying to bounce ideas off of everybody to, hopefully, gauge a happy-medium that most users will like.

Just because we don't intend to change the core idea doesn't mean we're not going to change the details.

I guess I can kind of see how some our responses may come off as obstinate, especially when we're asking people specific questions about why X thing isn't something they like, but honestly we're really trying to figure out why certain aspects of community tagging bother people since that mindset isn't something that most of the staff have.

We're not trying to be stubborn or anything, we're just trying to come to a mutual understanding of why people feel the way they do about community tagging, but I do apologize if we are coming off as hard-headed about this.

JassBefrold
08-20-2015, 09:00 AM
Well, to me this sound like a good news.

I mostly decided to leave weasly and removed most of my art from FA because of this judgmental classification of art. Knowing now that people could use tag and ban tag they don't wanna see, is more respectfull and stay a individual choice.

I really respect that. Now it seems a lot of people don't know how to tag things or are too lazy for it. Unfortunuatly there is no other way.

-You choose to be lazy then you have a system that do it for you but with limitation and classification.

-You want more freedom and choice, well you have to work for it.

The only idea I see is to leave some tips around the tagging system to give people a clue about what they should do. If some people doesn't want to use tag, they should at least fill some requiere tag before posting art. With very few tags should be enough to keep it in the system and let people to choose if they want or not see that art appear in front of them.

That is just my opinion.

Edit1: There is a website called: http://drawcrowd.com/ . They do not use any classification but only tags. The only policy is just no porn (nudity isn't porn). Even though, it's not a obligation to use tag there.

weykent
08-20-2015, 10:00 AM
I had an idea while discussing this offline today, and I think it solves a number of the issues raised in the thread. Simply put, involve the community more in community tagging. Someone can suggest a tag for a submission, and the community can vote on which tags are appropriate or inappropriate for a submission. There's a lot of bikeshedding possible here, but it seems like it would be reasonable to do something simple like "if a tag gets three votes for appropriate or inappropriate, that's its final status", and then to change it from there the mods could be appealed and make a decision of whether the status should be changed.

If proposed tags were still usable to find/filter submissions, it wouldn't even be much of a change from the current state, and it would even neatly handle the case of "the submitter has left the site".

blufawx
08-20-2015, 10:15 AM
I'm not sure where you're seeing "we're not changing it" from? Yes, we intend to keep community tagging as a core idea but we're trying to bounce ideas off of everybody to, hopefully, gauge a happy-medium that most users will like. .

But the problem is community tagging as a 'core idea' is going to drive people away. I even had up where other people could find me elsewhere and it got deleted under some arbitrary rule (this where I'll be told I'm wrong, attempted to make look foolish, etc.) not even 24 hours after i spoke out against community tagging. hmm..

As I've said before, and it's curious that rather than address this I've been asked stupid questions about stuff on issues not pertaining to it, why wasn't there an opt-in upon sign up and why isn't there an opt-out feature? most sites offer at least an opt-out on features. I feel like Weasyl knew this was going to be a problem but then decided not to do anything anyway, which caused the creation of this thread.

I know that because of community tagging I've already asked several artists who are working on commissions for me not to post them to Weasyl. and I've also demonstrated that there are several other people who feel as I do.

Is there a code limitation on an opt-out? or is it a case of lazyitis

- - - Updated - - -


I had an idea while discussing this offline today, and I think it solves a number of the issues raised in the thread. Simply put, involve the community more in community tagging. Someone can suggest a tag for a submission, and the community can vote on which tags are appropriate or inappropriate for a submission.

so give the community MORE power while giving the content creator none.

If you're allowing the "community" to vote on it, without the content creator being able to delete the tag in the first place, or have a final veto on the vote then what's the point? You're ceding power away from CC, which for me is the whole reason I'm griping.

The "community" should NOT be deciding what tags go on MY created content.

Oly
08-20-2015, 10:52 AM
Agreed that voting isn't a good idea.

Being able to suggest is a whole other game from the community just deciding overall.

weykent
08-20-2015, 10:58 AM
Agreed that voting isn't a good idea.

Being able to suggest is a whole other game from the community just deciding overall.

Can you elaborate on this? Voting can be used in combination with a lot of other proposed ideas in this thread, and I definitely was not trying to suggest it would be the only change made.

- - - Updated - - -


Voting would take too long for anyone not super popular. I also feel like that'd be an unnecessary workload for staff. I like the other ideas better.

Originally I was thinking there would be a page where people could browse proposed tags. Others have already suggested they like the idea of having a thing where they can browse submissions that need tags and add them, and this would be similar, but it wouldn't require as much effort. That would give every submission equal exposure.

What extra work would this give staff? Staff already have to deal with tagging disputes.

Noxid
08-20-2015, 11:31 AM
Voting sounds like a nice idea in theory, but like you said earlier there have only been ~500 people that have even bothered to add any tags in the first place, so I'd worry that there wouldn't be enough engagement to make it worthwhile

weykent
08-20-2015, 11:35 AM
Voting sounds like a nice idea in theory, but like you said earlier there have only been ~500 people that have even bothered to add any tags in the first place, so I'd worry that there wouldn't be enough engagement to make it worthwhile

This was a thing I was thinking about, and I think there's ways of getting the community more involved with tagging. I do also like the idea of showing people a series of random submissions and asking them to add a few tags.

Oly
08-20-2015, 11:43 AM
Voting sounds more complicated than it needs to be to me, both in function and in effort to implement on a technical level. Also agreed that for anyone who isn't real popular it would be slow. It just sounds clunky to me.

weykent
08-20-2015, 11:44 AM
Voting sounds more complicated than it needs to be to me, both in function and in effort to implement on a technical level. Also agreed that for anyone who isn't real popular it would be slow. It just sounds clunky to me.

I'm not too concerned with the technical side of things at the moment. How would it be slow for people who weren't popular if there was a page listing all submissions with pending tags?

Noxid
08-20-2015, 12:17 PM
This was a thing I was thinking about, and I think there's ways of getting the community more involved with tagging. I do also like the idea of showing people a series of random submissions and asking them to add a few tags.

Maybe some sort of gamification thing could work, I actually was thinking about that a while back, but it'd be very hit-or-miss I think. I'm not sure how most people would react to it.

blufawx
08-20-2015, 12:50 PM
I'm not too concerned with the technical side of things at the moment. How would it be slow for people who weren't popular if there was a page listing all submissions with pending tags?

And yet you still haven't given a reason why the community should be given even more power than they already have compared to CCs.

"I want to add <insert tag here> on <insert person>'s submission"
"put it to a vote along with the other tags, let's make it even more communistic"
<content creator leaves rather than deal with that mess>

Putting things up to a vote doesn't work, look at the US electoral process for more information.

DrunkCat
08-20-2015, 01:03 PM
Putting things up to a vote doesn't work, look at the US electoral process for more information.

That's because people don't vote. The process needs participation to work and currently it averages around 34% (US voting). If anything you're arguing for a stricter segregation to community tags to encourage more participation by the community to ensure it works better.

Anything that hampers the community will dissuade it from participating and indeed make it worse for everyone involved. I don't remember who said it but I completely agree with the sentiment that tags are in the same category as comments.

blufawx
08-20-2015, 01:32 PM
That's because people don't vote. The process needs participation to work and currently it averages around 34% (US voting). If anything you're arguing for a stricter segregation to community tags to encourage more participation by the community to ensure it works better.

No, what I've been arguing for is no community say in tagging. None. nyet. zip. zero.



Anything that hampers the community will dissuade it from participating and indeed make it worse for everyone involved. I don't remember who said it but I completely agree with the sentiment that tags are in the same category as comments.

Comments and tagging are two completely different things.

DrunkCat
08-20-2015, 01:51 PM
How so? Assuming a community set of tags, they're both forms of feedback/participation.

blufawx
08-20-2015, 02:03 PM
How so? Assuming a community set of tags, they're both forms of feedback/participation.

In the grand scheme of things, comments mean nothing and can come a dime a dozen.

Tags are stuck to your picture/story/what have you and are the difference between someone seeing it or not.

DrunkCat
08-20-2015, 02:28 PM
Tags can mean nothing if you choose to ignore community tags. Comments also are stuck to the picture/story/what have you so they're still the same in that regard. It's not like comments don't share the same pit falls as tags, in fact they can be even more damaging (http://s3.amazonaws.com/theoatmeal-img/comics/making_things/16.jpg).

Also I don't think anyone is champion a paradigm where the only tags are community tags though. So there is no worry in terms of community tags determining visibility. If anything, one could feasibly get more visibility via community tags if there is a more popular tag the original artist might've missed.

ganache
08-20-2015, 02:41 PM
I don't understand how making community tagging more engaging (through voting in this case) is going to encourage CC's turned off by the tagging system in the first place to post again?

and drunkcat, the visibility gained from those tags added, again, may not be in the CC's interest and that's my single problem with this. Visibility is great but I'd be weirded out if suddenly the addition of X anatomical tag made my submission more popular.

weykent
08-20-2015, 03:00 PM
I don't understand how making community tagging more engaging is going to encourage CC's turned off by the tagging system in the first place to post again?

I've been trying to understand what sorts of tags it is that people don't want added, and so far it seems to be:
Gender tags and/or slurs (which could require extra scrutiny or only be added by submitters/staff or something else)
Synonyms (which would be cut down on by implementing tag implications and a standard tagging policy)
Inaccurate tags, i.e. tags which do not accurately describe the content (which could be solved with voting, which would benefit from engagement)
Words that the submitter doesn't like (which could be marked as "not shown on submission" by the submitter, but still could be used for filtering)


Is there any unwanted class of tags not covered here? The thing I'm trying to understand overall here is how to make community tagging seem like more of a net positive to the skeptics, and make it easier to handle the cases they're concerned about.

DrunkCat
08-20-2015, 03:10 PM
I don't understand how making community tagging more engaging (through voting in this case) is going to encourage CC's turned off by the tagging system in the first place to post again?

and drunkcat, the visibility gained from those tags added, again, may not be in the CC's interest and that's my single problem with this. Visibility is great but I'd be weirded out if suddenly the addition of X anatomical tag made my submission more popular.

Isn't the whole point of posting to a public gallery for visibility? Wouldn't you make it "closed" or invite only otherwise? This is assuming "x" tag is appropriate, I'd understand the aversion if x tag was incorrectly applied (piece contains no x at all); which a flagging system would adequately take care of. Especially since according to statistics subversive tags are a rarity.

blufawx
08-20-2015, 03:37 PM
The thing I'm trying to understand overall here is how to make community tagging seem like more of a net positive to the skeptics, and make it easier to handle the cases they're concerned about.

I can only speak for myself obviously but from what I've gleaned from other comments on another thread, that's not going to happen. It's a negative over all as it gives the 'community' too much power over created content.

I know that's why I like FA--I create the content, or have it created for me, I submit it, I control the tags.

same with SoFurry.

The first time someone on Weasyl added a tag to my work, it turned me off forever and I only really use it because of friends and people that do draw things for me add them here.

DrunkCat
08-20-2015, 04:25 PM
Why is it "too much power"? Assuming the artist doesn't have the option to just turn it off, how would a community pool of tags for a piece constitute any more power than them hotlinking it to friends or commenting?

I'll echo weykent in asking what exactly is the great terror of a user finding a piece via a tag that was added by the community (assuming it's valid since if it wasn't it would've been flagged/removed)? And if that's not the 'negative' then what is? The act of tagging itself?

ganache
08-20-2015, 04:28 PM
Isn't the whole point of posting to a public gallery for visibility? Wouldn't you make it "closed" or invite only otherwise?

For most people, of course it is. I'm not saying it isn't, but when I'm an exception to that myself I don't agree it's "the whole point" for everybody.

If I want to share something privately I wouldn't be posting it at all, since that can be done through different means. I don't want to shirk off visibility of my submissions totally, I just want it on a minimal basis sometimes, however mildly on my terms. Some things I want seen as much as possible, sure, but a lot I'd rather have just stumbled upon as it inevitably would be. An addition of tags, so long as they lead to my submission in some way, gives me the vibe that it'll go against my wishes. It widens the pool of tags my submission appears in, and I'm not comfortable with that. Logic isn't overriding my emotions on the matter, that's it.

I mean, I wouldn't care so much if tags are added to something I need attention on, like a price sheet or something for sale, but for personal work it's going to bother me if I don't have the choice to accept tags before they're active, is that a word for it?

I could really use clarification on how added tags go to use, since I'm under the impression once they're added, they're a working search term, unless they're removed again or something - if this process is reactive and not proactive on the CC's part, I'm going to have reservations about what I'm willing to post knowing that.

weykent
08-20-2015, 04:33 PM
For most people, of course it is. I'm not saying it isn't, but when I'm an exception to that myself I don't agree it's "the whole point" for everybody.

If I want to share something privately I wouldn't be posting it at all, since that can be done through different means. I don't want to shirk off visibility of my submissions totally, I just want it on a minimal basis sometimes, however mildly on my terms. Some things I want seen as much as possible, sure, but a lot I'd rather have just stumbled upon as it inevitably would be. An addition of tags, so long as they lead to my submission in some way, gives me the vibe that it'll go against my wishes. It widens the pool of tags my submission appears in, and I'm not comfortable with that. Logic isn't overriding my emotions on the matter, that's it.

I mean, I wouldn't care so much if tags are added to something I need attention on, like a price sheet or something for sale, but for personal work it's going to bother me if I don't have the choice to accept tags before they're active, is that a word for it?

I could really use clarification on how added tags go to use, since I'm under the impression once they're added, they're a working search term, unless they're removed again or something - if this process is reactive and not proactive on the CC's part, I'm going to have reservations about what I'm willing to post knowing that.

It's a long thread, so apologies if you've already seen these posts, but I think that Bornes covered this pretty well:
https://forums.weasyl.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?7738-Community-Tagging-Overview&p=89366&viewfull=1#post89366
https://forums.weasyl.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?7738-Community-Tagging-Overview&p=89390&viewfull=1#post89390

DrunkCat
08-20-2015, 04:39 PM
https://forums.weasyl.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?7738-Community-Tagging-Overview&p=89366&viewfull=1#post89366
https://forums.weasyl.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?7738-Community-Tagging-Overview&p=89390&viewfull=1#post89390

That fellow nails the entire thing pretty well. Weasyl is a community for artists and patrons, if you don't want to be part of the community then why be here?

blufawx
08-20-2015, 05:22 PM
That fellow nails the entire thing pretty well. Weasyl is a community for artists and patrons, if you don't want to be part of the community then why be here?

So just because someone doesn't like community tagging means they don't want to be a part of the community? Just because they want complete and total control over the tagging like every other allows?

There's more to a community than just tagging than are dreamt of in your philosophies, Horatio.

The sad part that you and they said this and it feels like there are staff actively encouraging people to leave is what's most telling. So much for 'community'. Should not a 'community' be people of differing opinions and thoughts? or should we all goosestep to the same drum, comrade?

ganache
08-20-2015, 05:31 PM
I was aware of those responses and have thought back to them already. I don't disagree with them totally, but I'm still disappointed.

I'm not saying I don't want to interact with weasyl's community period, it's that I don't like how it's done through tagging in its present form. I've spoken up at all because I want the site grow, not shrink or go stagnant because this system turns people off, and added my two cents just to expand on a way this isn't taking off as well as it could. Reasons aren't always serious when people dislike things enough to drop them totally, but my point is they add up.

If fostering community is the issue, I think other means of interaction need to take priority over tagging stuff that isn't yours anyway, when it's so contentious and will probably stay so while other things go unchanged. It makes this debacle seem like a bigger grievance than it has to, and I'd be less concerned about people disagreeing with the tagging policy if there were more to current site features to make up for it. Improving the note system, or making it easier to see who others are following/followed by - things that actually let users get to know each other?? That feels lacking, while tagging (presently) comes off as invasive to enough CC's to have warranted this conversation.

DrunkCat
08-20-2015, 06:37 PM
So just because someone doesn't like community tagging means they don't want to be a part of the community? Just because they want complete and total control over the tagging like every other allows?
Well, yes. As Bornes said it's a matter of collaboration and sharing. Having complete control just leads weasyl down the path of being a an image storage database. There can be compromise but neutering the entire feature would remove something that indeed makes Weasyl unique.


The sad part that you and they said this and it feels like there are staff actively encouraging people to leave is what's most telling. So much for 'community'. Should not a 'community' be people of differing opinions and thoughts? or should we all goosestep to the same drum, comrade?
The fact that I'm not permanently banned speaks volumes to Weasyl's acceptance of opinion and thoughts. Hell, this entire thread was made to seek out a compromise on the matter and field new ideas. For now, Weasyl wants to strive to be a full collaborative website, and to weasyl, that means community tagging. (for now)

What that means is that by taking such an extreme polarized stance is that you are deciding that Weasyl is not for you. Dissent and opinions are welcomed, but you have not offered either. You've stayed to your guns that community tagging is a great evil and given no indication that you're willing to compromise. Do you think there is no irony in asking for Weasyl to be accommodating and not reciprocating?

BlueJaySF
08-20-2015, 06:45 PM
Having complete control just leads weasyl down the path of being a an image storage database.

And having the tagging feature as-is will lead to unfettered trolling by malicious users and their spambots?

Not everyone who sees the option to refuse community tagging will make use of it, the same as having the option for tagging by the community will not be used by the majority of the community, regardless of the outcome of their tagging.

Nowhere near so many people as are registered have used the tagging feature, and yet this site has not collapsed. Implementing the option to uniformly revoke the option should the uploader choose that path will not bring about the site's destruction.

DrunkCat
08-20-2015, 06:47 PM
And having the tagging feature as-is will lead to unfettered trolling by malicious users and their spambots?


Apparently this is about as rampant as US voter fraud so... No?


Implementing the option to uniformly revoke the option should the uploader choose that path will not bring about the site's destruction.

I agree, it should be wholesale.


Question! 'u`
Because there are 19 pages of VERY long posts and I really don't feel like checking to see if it's been suggested already.

Have you guys considered making a "preset" but on going pool of tags that mods can approve of to avoid any stupid shit from being fabricated? Very GENERAL stuff? There are some obvious glaring issues with this, but I'll let you guys pick it apart or you can direct to whomever may have said it first.

Oh oh, I have. :3

BlueJaySF
08-20-2015, 07:12 PM
I agree, it should be wholesale.

Baiting me won't work.

Bornes
08-20-2015, 07:14 PM
And having the tagging feature as-is will lead to unfettered trolling by malicious users and their spambots? Except it hasn't, as proven by stats given by mods?


Not everyone who sees the option to refuse community tagging will make use of it, the same as having the option for tagging by the community will not be used by the majority of the community, regardless of the outcome of their tagging.
If I remember correctly, Weasyl was founded with community tagging as being one of the pillar features during its creation. It was touted as one of the things it was most proud of and what made it different from other sites. I was too late for the Kickstarter but I did pay my dues to get into the early invite. Point being here is that community tagging is one of the foundations of why this site was created in the first place, so that's why the site is centered around it (and why the search feature works the way it does).

Because the search feature only works with tags, having no, misleading*, or very few tags actively harms the creator (no visibility), the general user (not able to search or find content, or blacklist certain things), and the community of the site.
By having no, few, or misleading* tags, not only does this make the search feature unuseable (can't find stuff because people don't tag), it makes the blacklist feature useless (can't blacklist stuff that won't use your blacklist tags), and it fosters a culture that says "tagging isn't important."

If Weasyl allows a content creator to opt out from community tagging, ENTIRELY, it is willfully kicking a lot of features the site has in the shins, as well as saying "it's 100% ok to not participate in the very thing that makes Weasyl Weasyl."

But let's say that Weasyl does say you can opt out of community tagging. What could be the long-term ramifications of this (Assuming no other changes are made)?

- A lot of CCs turn the feature off because they don't like it for whatever reason
- A lot of submissions have no, few, or misleading* tags
- A lot of people can't blacklist stuff they want
- Since so many CCs have opted out, many people don't waste time trying to add tags to CCs that allow it
- Tags get blamed for being useless
- Search feature gets blamed for being shit
- Blacklist gets blamed for being useless
- People don't use Weasyl

(Hey this sort of sounds like what's happening right now!)

Now, Weasyl could decide to get rid of community tagging alltogether, and yeah I'd be sad but I wouldn't quit the site over it, but it seems the staff really doesn't want to, which means that community tagging is here to stay and we need to figure out a way to get it to work without everyone getting up in arms over it.


Nowhere near so many people as are registered have used the tagging feature, and yet this site has not collapsed. Implementing the option to uniformly revoke the option should the uploader choose that path will not bring about the site's destruction.
It will bring about inactivity and it promotes the view that tagging is unimportant.

Tagging IS important, but because Weasyl has not promoted it that well, CCs actively discourage its use and punish users for using the feature, it has scared people off from tagging.

If community tagging is important to the site and what Weasyl wants to continue doing, then it needs to foster an atmosphere where tagging work is encouraged, and there is no fear of being punished for accidentally adding something you thought was ok.

In order to foster that sort of environment, Weasyl needs to work on a lot of things, many of which have been suggestions earlier in this thread (gamification, anonymous tagging, allow/disallow, unified/global tag lists, suggestions, etc.)


*misleading tags in this sense mean something that the artist tags but the viewer may not directly see, such as "male" but there's a vagina in the picture because the male is an FtM. "Misleading" is not really the right word choice for this, as this whole thing is very much another can of worms entirely, but it does impact searches, especially for people who want to use the blacklist for certain things. The use of those types of tags from a CC without the inclusion of other types of tags may be (indirectly, unintentionally) subversive to that purpose (of the blacklist).
Also I'd like to apologize for using the word "Misleading" here in advance. I have no idea what else to call it in this instance. I am IN NO WAY saying that an FtM is NOT male.

Kalmor
08-20-2015, 07:14 PM
Simple solution:

Make community tagging optional at the upload stage for the submitter. Let the users choose whether or not they want their stuff to be tagged by other people or not.

Oly
08-20-2015, 07:17 PM
So just because someone doesn't like community tagging means they don't want to be a part of the community? Just because they want complete and total control over the tagging like every other allows?

There's more to a community than just tagging than are dreamt of in your philosophies, Horatio.

The sad part that you and they said this and it feels like there are staff actively encouraging people to leave is what's most telling. So much for 'community'. Should not a 'community' be people of differing opinions and thoughts? or should we all goosestep to the same drum, comrade?

You seem like a decent person and you're definitely passionate from what i've seen, but really if this is such a big deal that it breaks the site for you, I mean... I don't want to tell anyone where to go or not go regardless of my personal feelings, but at that point you have to choose if you want to stay and make it work or not. Making it work might require you to compromise. I get that for some people that's something they seldom if ever do(I would not claim innocence from that myself, certainly.)

I guess what I'm saying is that I hope you can stay and manage to help find compromise you can be happy with along with everyone else because having passionate people around helps to make a community great. But if that doesn't happen I hope you can find somewhere you can feel comfortable at, too.

BlueJaySF
08-20-2015, 07:18 PM
Except it hasn't, as proven by stats given by mods?

I was not asking a question, I was issuing a rebuttal.

blufawx
08-20-2015, 07:21 PM
Well, yes. As Bornes said it's a matter of collaboration and sharing. Having complete control just leads weasyl down the path of being a an image storage database. There can be compromise but neutering the entire feature would remove something that indeed makes Weasyl unique.

I don't think I've ever said completely remove it.

I've said give us an opt-in (at sign up) for community; and an opt-out for those of us already signed up.

I mean is that so hard? really?

Noxid
08-20-2015, 07:23 PM
Simple solution:

Make community tagging optional at the upload stage for the submitter. Let the users choose whether or not they want their stuff to be tagged by other people or not.

tags are important for blacklisting as well as searching. By allowing disabling community tags on uploads it would become impossible for people to filter out content they don't wish to see from inadequately tagged material. So I don't think this alone can solve the problem.

DrunkCat
08-20-2015, 07:24 PM
Baiting me won't work.

What? I agree with you. I think having an option turn community tags on/off for an upload to be feasible, it would just have to be wholesale (i.e. it disables the entire feature).

- - - Updated - - -


Except it hasn't, as proven by stats given by mods?

If I remember correctly, Weasyl was founded with community tagging as being one of the pillar features during its creation. It was touted as one of the things it was most proud of and what made it different from other sites. I was too late for the Kickstarter but I did pay my dues to get into the early invite. Point being here is that community tagging is one of the foundations of why this site was created in the first place, so that's why the site is centered around it (and why the search feature works the way it does).

Because the search feature only works with tags, having no, misleading*, or very few tags actively harms the creator (no visibility), the general user (not able to search or find content, or blacklist certain things), and the community of the site.
By having no, few, or misleading* tags, not only does this make the search feature unuseable (can't find stuff because people don't tag), it makes the blacklist feature useless (can't blacklist stuff that won't use your blacklist tags), and it fosters a culture that says "tagging isn't important."

If Weasyl allows a content creator to opt out from community tagging, ENTIRELY, it is willfully kicking a lot of features the site has in the shins, as well as saying "it's 100% ok to not participate in the very thing that makes Weasyl Weasyl."

But let's say that Weasyl does say you can opt out of community tagging. What could be the long-term ramifications of this (Assuming no other changes are made)?

- A lot of CCs turn the feature off because they don't like it for whatever reason
- A lot of submissions have no, few, or misleading* tags
- A lot of people can't blacklist stuff they want
- Since so many CCs have opted out, many people don't waste time trying to add tags to CCs that allow it
- Tags get blamed for being useless
- Search feature gets blamed for being shit
- Blacklist gets blamed for being useless
- People don't use Weasyl

(Hey this sort of sounds like what's happening right now!)

Now, Weasyl could decide to get rid of community tagging alltogether, and yeah I'd be sad but I wouldn't quit the site over it, but it seems the staff really doesn't want to, which means that community tagging is here to stay and we need to figure out a way to get it to work without everyone getting up in arms over it.


It will bring about inactivity and it promotes the view that tagging is unimportant.

Tagging IS important, but because Weasyl has not promoted it that well, CCs actively discourage its use and punish users for using the feature, it has scared people off from tagging.

If community tagging is important to the site and what Weasyl wants to continue doing, then it needs to foster an atmosphere where tagging work is encouraged, and there is no fear of being punished for accidentally adding something you thought was ok.

In order to foster that sort of environment, Weasyl needs to work on a lot of things, many of which have been suggestions earlier in this thread (gamification, anonymous tagging, allow/disallow, unified/global tag lists, suggestions, etc.)


*misleading tags in this sense mean something that the artist tags but the viewer may not directly see, such as "male" but there's a vagina in the picture because the male is an FtM. "Misleading" is not really the right word choice for this, as this whole thing is very much another can of worms entirely, but it does impact searches, especially for people who want to use the blacklist for certain things. The use of those types of tags from a CC without the inclusion of other types of tags may be (indirectly, unintentionally) subversive to that purpose (of the blacklist).
Also I'd like to apologize for using the word "Misleading" here in advance. I have no idea what else to call it in this instance. I am IN NO WAY saying that an FtM is NOT male.

You da bes. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZVUyyHYkBHk)

EDIT: Also after reading the above, and what noxid said about blacklisting, I'm rescinding my support for it being optional. Especially if it's a cornerstone feature. The blacklisting is also a good argument.

Kalmor
08-20-2015, 07:46 PM
tags are important for blacklisting as well as searching. By allowing disabling community tags on uploads it would become impossible for people to filter out content they don't wish to see from inadequately tagged material. So I don't think this alone can solve the problem.

Still something you should at least think about doing if I'm completely honest.

Perhaps you can introduce a "report tag" option where users can flag false or inappropriate tags?

ganache
08-20-2015, 07:48 PM
Tagging being a central aspect of the site's function is not something I was aware of when I joined last year. I appreciate the eye opener on how much it's used for different things, actually, but it's like I'm learning this too late. Making it sound like it's something users just come in understanding when functionality like this isn't the case elsewhere - there's no telling how many other people don't/didn't either, and left expecting something else. If I realized how much this would impact my experience back then... I don't even know anymore.

blufawx
08-20-2015, 08:09 PM
I still support an opt-in/opt-out.

Until Weasyl pays for my internet, pays for commissions, or pays me for the time it takes me to create a story/color a piece of art, it's my content. no one elses.

armaina
08-20-2015, 08:23 PM
what should a user be able to do other than block all submissions by that submitter?Make it easier to report tags on submissions along with including suggestions for tags :U It's going to be work either way because you're either going to get reports for tag altering abuse, or reports for lack of tagging. It is literally unavoidable. Also remember that just because a handful of people would opt out, does not mean every other member will.

Also if you can show that the community isn't as malicious as people fear it to be, or that you actually do something consistently about malicious tagging, people will be willing to opt back in!! Maybe give your submitters the ability to choose where their trust lies (by way of opt out) in order to earn their trust.

On the suggestion side of things - Tag pools, (cat/cats same tag) as mentioned before, and tagging suggestions, tagging auto-fill, as well as 'recognized' or 'populated' tags by the site itself for simple things, as this can help artists tag stuff in the first place so they won't be flustered about what term/phrase to use in the first place.

Also important - Not so much a code change but creating a common structure for tags, a 'style guide' if you will. Like, maybe make a consensus on tags that are specifically character names belonging to a specific creator. some people have common names and would like to distinguish themselves amongst others, so say you give resources that indicate that creator: charactername is the common tagform, for specific character tags. Character names is just one thing, but having a 'style guide' for tagging format could be helpful in many other instances where the same word can be used to describe different things.

A more robust feature in the future, if you can, are tag suggestions based on tags that have already been added if there are enough other common tags related to it. A lot of artists may forget something, not out of intentionally forgetting it, but forgetting that's a tag to tag for that people can look for. Between autofills and suggestions can bridge the gap of bare or missing tags.

Socks the Fox
08-20-2015, 08:27 PM
I think one thing that might help is making language around tagging while uploading more clear about how important tagging your art accurately is. Something along the lines of "Tagging is an important feature Weasyl uses that makes it easier for users to find your work! Tagging also helps users understand your work and the subjects involved. Please take a moment to add as many tags as you think might be needed to help with this. What's going on in this work? Who or what all is involved? Also, users might think of tags you may have missed and add them to better help others find your work too!"

Edit: Oh please give us an easy way to tag characters! something like "socksthefox:Jade" where the colon both tells the system it's a character tag as well as separate the owner and character (i.e. maybe a person would want to search for all art involving my characters they'd search "owner:socksthefox". They wouldn't even have to be registered on the site since it's just tags.

Bornes
08-20-2015, 08:38 PM
Tagging being a central aspect of the site's function is not something I was aware of when I joined last year. I appreciate the eye opener on how much it's used for different things, actually, but it's like I'm learning this too late. Making it sound like it's something users just come in understanding when functionality like this isn't the case elsewhere - there's no telling how many other people don't/didn't either, and left expecting something else. If I realized how much this would impact my experience back then... I don't even know anymore.Hey Ganache, this might come off as really weird but I've read a lot of your posts over the past few months and while I don't think this site is really a good match for you (in its current state), I do want to say that I have nothing against you and that if there were some sort of award available for good character/attitude, that you should get it because you've been nothing but respectful through all your posts and threads, despite being at odds with a lot of the features and trying to understand how/why they work the way they do.

That being said, I think your opinions and posts are super helpful, even though you use the site quite differently from many people. Maybe Weasyl can figure out how to support users like you better, or maybe it won't.. But users like you also help pinpoint what Weasyl is doing wrong, which is especially helpful here because not knowing community tagging impacts so much is kind of a huge thing that Weasyl needs to figure out why is happening.

I am not sure how to fix the problem of community tagging not being as visible as it should be. I am a little biased since I've been on the site so long and just kind of "know."
But if Weasyl wants to attract new users, it needs to do so in a way that it attracts the type of users that will want to use the site in the way that Weasyl has intended. It has clearly failed in that regard.

That doesn't make you or Weasyl bad at all. It is a miscommunication issue and I think Weasyl has a lot of that going on for several different things.
(My main gripe that I love to complain about is this being a general art site, but clearly marketed only toward one specific community)

Anyway I feel kind of bad about this whole thing because you are a really nice person and you kind of got caught up in all this not even knowing what you got into. And that's Weasyl's fault, I think, for not making it very clear what the site stands for and what it wants.

I hope there is a solution that will help most people and you figure out what you want to do.

blufawx
08-20-2015, 09:08 PM
Hey Ganache, this might come off as really weird but I've read a lot of your posts over the past few months and while I don't think this site is really a good match for you (in its current state)

I love how easily you're trying to get a rid of people. You know, there was another group in history that had this "xxxx-only utopia" ideal.

Just sayin.

DrunkCat
08-20-2015, 09:24 PM
I love how easily you're trying to get a rid of people. You know, there was another group in history that had this "xxxx-only utopia" ideal.

Just sayin.

Wow. And BlueJay thought I was baiting.

Also how can one get rid of people that don't want to be here in the first place?

blufawx
08-20-2015, 09:30 PM
Wow. And BlueJay thought I was baiting.

Also how can one get rid of people that don't want to be here in the first place?

Well, you're ASSuming they don't want to be here simply because they disagree with you and the staff on community tagging.

YOU and people like you have created this 'us vs them' mentality, yet you get on me for simply having the opinion that communit tagging is bad.

DrunkCat
08-20-2015, 09:34 PM
Are you the type of person to go to a burger-only restaurant and complain that they won't serve you pizza?

It's not a matter of disagreeing or agreeing. The discussion is on how best to do community tags. No one is forcing you to use Weasyl, and resorting to godwins law doesn't do well for your case of "simply having an opinion".

Oly
08-20-2015, 09:36 PM
I love how easily you're trying to get a rid of people. You know, there was another group in history that had this "xxxx-only utopia" ideal.

Just sayin.

Why cherry pick and leave out the next part where they say how helpful they think ganache's posts and input are?

I don't see anybody trying to get rid of anybody. It's unfortunate but there's always gonna be someone unhappy with any choice the site makes. If that's extreme enough to the point that someone decides to leave that sucks but ultimately it's for the best, isn't it? Instead of someone in that position banging their head against a wall trying to fit into a system that is ultimately not a good fit?

It's not a case of 'we don't want your kind here.' It's a case of 'pick the tool that works for the job you need to do.' If Weasyl doesn't meet your needs as a tool, then you shouldn't try to force it any more than you should try to force the wrong type of screwdriver to work when you need to take a screw out... except that this 'screwdriver' is actually asking for feedback to see if it can adapt to meet your needs, feedback which you have given, and which has been engaged! So I'm not sure why you feel the need to act like anybody is trying to shut anybody else up.

DrunkCat
08-20-2015, 09:38 PM
Why cherry pick and leave out the next part where they say how helpful they think ganache's posts and input are?


Because then the "us vs. them" jab wouldn't carry the same punch.

piñardilla
08-20-2015, 09:43 PM
Alright, so here's a thought: Long ago, we had a program granting a sort of half-mod status for users called Ferrets. We could possibly bring back this program for the purpose of policing community tags, if it will make the idea less contentious.

An idea of how I see this possibly working, just as an example: Community tags are invisible until approved by a Ferret, who have a FIFO tag queue (possible prioritization could be given to a specific subset of "problem" tags, or tags added by multiple users). Content owners don't receive a tag notification until Ferret approval, and unapproved tags are tossed unnoticed by anyone, and possibly reported for administrative action if they are abusive in nature.

Bornes
08-20-2015, 09:44 PM
It's not a case of 'we don't want your kind here.' It's a case of 'pick the tool that works for the job you need to do.' If Weasyl doesn't meet your needs as a tool, then you shouldn't try to force it any more than you should try to force the wrong type of screwdriver to work when you need to take a screw out... except that this 'screwdriver' is actually asking for feedback to see if it can adapt to meet your needs, feedback which you have given, and which has been engaged! So I'm not sure why you feel the need to act like anybody is trying to shut anybody else up.

Thank you, that is worded a lot better than what I have been saying. But it is what I mean.

- - - Updated - - -


Alright, so here's a thought: Long ago, we had a program granting a sort of half-mod status for users called Ferrets. We could possibly bring back this program for the purpose of policing community tags, if it will make the idea less contentious.

An idea of how I see this possibly working, just as an example: Community tags are invisible until approved by a Ferret, who have a FIFO tag queue (possible prioritization could be given to a specific subset of "problem" tags, or tags added by multiple users). Content owners don't receive a tag notification until Ferret approval, and unapproved tags are tossed unnoticed by anyone, and possibly reported for administrative action if they are abusive in nature.

What happens when a CC doesn't agree with a ferret's approval?

blufawx
08-20-2015, 09:47 PM
Alright, so here's a thought: Long ago, we had a program granting a sort of half-mod status for users called Ferrets. We could possibly bring back this program for the purpose of policing community tags, if it will make the idea less contentious.

An idea of how I see this possibly working, just as an example: Community tags are invisible until approved by a Ferret, who have a FIFO tag queue (possible prioritization could be given to a specific subset of "problem" tags, or tags added by multiple users). Content owners don't receive a tag notification until Ferret approval, and unapproved tags are tossed unnoticed by anyone, and possibly reported for administrative action if they are abusive in nature.

Why approved by the "Ferret" ?

You're removing the choice of whether to approve it from the CC and putting to a middle man, thereby giving the CC no power whatsoever.

piñardilla
08-20-2015, 09:57 PM
What happens when a CC doesn't agree with a ferret's approval?

This is all still hypothetical so what happens from there is still up in the air, but I'd imagine the submission owner gets an approve/reject prompt with the notification. If they click approve, it becomes an owner tag. If they reject, the tag gets removed but the Ferret gets a notification. Ferrets might then elevate the issue to the mod team, though we'd instruct them to give artists as much leeway as possible and to reserve that for stuff like scat porn that the owner refuses to let be tagged "scat" and such.

Bornes
08-20-2015, 10:46 PM
This is all still hypothetical so what happens from there is still up in the air, but I'd imagine the submission owner gets an approve/reject prompt with the notification. If they click approve, it becomes an owner tag. If they reject, the tag gets removed but the Ferret gets a notification. Ferrets might then elevate the issue to the mod team, though we'd instruct them to give artists as much leeway as possible and to reserve that for stuff like scat porn that the owner refuses to let be tagged "scat" and such.

I feel like that just adds a completely unnecessary middle step.

You could just allow CCs to approve/disapprove all tags, and any disapproved tag might be checked by a Ferret at that point (if you wanted ferrets again)

Or you could allow the CCs to have that whole "don't tag with these following tags" at submission type deal. That was an idea I really liked. Then no need for approval/disapproval afterward-- CCs made their decision at submission.

Give only ferrets tag rights and nobody else, then either have CCs deal with their choices or have a reporting/escalation process if CCs disapprove of a ferret/tag.

All seem to be less roundabout ways of tagging.

DrunkCat
08-20-2015, 10:53 PM
The more that gets posted the more I feel there should just be a community tag set fed by suggestion pools and those that are selected enough times become actual community tags. Just go for it, try it for a couple a months and go from there.

Bornes
08-20-2015, 11:00 PM
Oh that sounds cool. I like that.

edit: As long as there is some type of flood protection. So one account requesting the same tag on same submission 3 times only counts as one suggestion.

Also maybe an account activity or age minimum to suggest a tag

ganache
08-20-2015, 11:44 PM
But if Weasyl wants to attract new users, it needs to do so in a way that it attracts the type of users that will want to use the site in the way that Weasyl has intended. It has clearly failed in that regard.

Anyway I feel kind of bad about this whole thing because you are a really nice person and you kind of got caught up in all this not even knowing what you got into. And that's Weasyl's fault, I think, for not making it very clear what the site stands for and what it wants.

Thank you - and I think that's what I was getting at, too, yes. There's a problem of people coming in (or just looking in, even) with expectations and impressions that don't match what Weasyl was built to be for a long time now. Re: tagging and other things, too. It's true there's a fair bit I don't mesh with currently, either, but what's kept me around (aside from the people I follow) is knowing that while my input may not always lead to what I hope it does, it's acknowledged in a way I can see. If tags remain unpalatable for me in the end... I tried. I was heard when I tried, and for that it all... bites less.

I don't feel like I'm being chased out. I'm just going to have to weigh whether I'd prefer being a watcher over an artist for a while.... I apologize for not being able to offer much of an idea for compromise all this while, honestly, since I'm interested in what may come out of all of this.

DrunkCat
08-21-2015, 12:41 AM
That's honestly a great response, especially:


I don't feel like I'm being chased out. I'm just going to have to weigh whether I'd prefer being a watcher over an artist for a while.... I apologize for not being able to offer much of an idea for compromise all this while, honestly, since I'm interested in what may come out of all of this.

Because no one is asking for anything more than that (http://squelchdesign.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/vanilla-ice-stop-collaborate-and-listen.jpeg).

arinaca
08-21-2015, 01:09 AM
I'm not sure why it hasn't already been implemented that the CC gets to control what tags are added to their work to be honest - it seems like the most logical thing. If there was an issue, say, a bad tag getting added there should be an option to report it (Approve Tag, Deny Tag, Report tag) for anyone trying to abuse the system. I suppose Ferrets could be brought back as mediators between someone really determined to add a tag that gets denied/reported etc. Then everyone can still tag if they choose to, but in the end the person doing the content gets to choose what best represents it. I think if people had the ability to control what happens to their work in terms of tagging are less likely to remove themselves completely, either via leaving, or opting out and being unsearchable if that's brought in.

I'm all for community tagging, I think it's a great idea especially because sometimes I just don't know what to type. I don't think my work has ever had tags added though (Do you even get a notification at the moment?) so maybe people feel like it's imposing on artists and aren't tagging even if they know a tag they could add?

Swanda
08-21-2015, 02:15 AM
You could just allow CCs to approve/disapprove all tags, and any disapproved tag might be checked by a Ferret at that point (if you wanted ferrets again)

If ferrets were reintroduced for tagging, this would definitely be the way to go about it!
This helps root out problems without intruding on the CC's rights for no good reason.

I kinda feel like a lot of people in this thread are disregarding CC's comfort completely in the name of efficiency. That's not finding a compromise that both parties can be happy with, it's the same kind of stubbornness as stamping the ground saying the system should be removed completely.

Weasyl isn't meant to be a file sharing/storing site, it's meant to be an artist community. Meaning that a chunk of the search efficiency other sites (who don't give two shits about CC's) have, will be lost. This is just a reality of it. The whole idea of a "valid" tag needs to be redefined here.

Just because X is displayed on a submission doesn't mean that X is a valid tag by default.
If X is visible but a minor part of the piece and the CC have decided that it is unimportant. Then X isn't a valid tag for any other reason than blocking. Yes the CC might lose out on some views if their submission doesn't show up in search under X, but ultimately CC have decided that those views would be gained for the wrong reason.
Having a vote system in place to lock tag X onto the submission, with no way for CC to remove it, wouldn't just be invasive, it would be outright abusive. It also sends a clear message that CC's have very little importance to the community, compared to what they create and those viewing it.

You might not personally understand why CC would want to miss out on those view, or why they would deem something like X unimportant, or even feel uncomfortable with X being tagged on their art. That however does Not mean that CC’s feelings are invalid, or should be disregarded.

Tags are not just commentary, they are also defining, and if CC doesn't want their art defined as X for any one reason, then that should be their choice, not the viewers.

And for those who have suggested here and other places that CC’s shouldn’t be able to touch community tags on their own submissions, let me just outline how awkward that is:
It would give me more power over tags on Other people's submissions, than on my own.
I would have more control over the tags on a random persons, whom I’ve never seen before, submission than over the tags on my own. That is a hella awkward situation imo.

blufawx
08-21-2015, 03:18 AM
I'm fine, in a way, with some moderation of what is deemed an appropriate tag and inappropriate.

I still think there needs to be an opt-out system for community tagging since it's obvious that not everyone wants or likes that. I know I'm not the only one, I'm just the most vocal.

weykent
08-21-2015, 03:53 AM
<snip>

I think that this line of discussion requires consideration of which tags submitters don't want to see. I made a post about it earlier, but I didn't see anyone reply to it yet: https://forums.weasyl.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?7738-Community-Tagging-Overview&p=89870&viewfull=1#post89870

You can say "a submitter doesn't want their art defined as {some tag} and that should be their choice", but I want to understand why. To me, it seems that when you consider the actual specific cases (instead of handwaving which tags make submitters uncomfortable), most of the issues are easily resolvable without having to give the submitter the final say.

Of course, I'm still definitely in favor of allowing submitters (or anyone else) to report a tag or tag suggestion or whatever.

Bornes
08-21-2015, 04:34 AM
I've been trying to understand what sorts of tags it is that people don't want added, and so far it seems to be:
Gender tags and/or slurs (which could require extra scrutiny or only be added by submitters/staff or something else)
Synonyms (which would be cut down on by implementing tag implications and a standard tagging policy)
Inaccurate tags, i.e. tags which do not accurately describe the content (which could be solved with voting, which would benefit from engagement)
Words that the submitter doesn't like (which could be marked as "not shown on submission" by the submitter, but still could be used for filtering)


Is there any unwanted class of tags not covered here? The thing I'm trying to understand overall here is how to make community tagging seem like more of a net positive to the skeptics, and make it easier to handle the cases they're concerned about.
I think you nailed it, honestly.

1. Someone tags an MtF as "male" or "ladyboy" or wants to remove the tag "woman." CC takes all this insultingly because to them the figure in the art is a woman, no matter the body configuration, because it is their character. Also some terms (like herm) are usually only used for porn. If this is an artistic nude, the CC may not want anyone who was interested in herm porn finding the image and jerking to it, because that would be really disgusting in their eyes, and maybe even invalidating.
Pretty much everything related to gender right now is a minefield because the internet is used to trans characters being sex objects for porn only. Trans rights activists are changing this and the vocabulary will take time to change on the internet. Right now we have kind of a weird culture thing going on where some terms that seem ok (herm, ladyboy) are actually really offensive slurs now, even when exclusively used for porn.
I'm not saying this because I'm against any of this (quite the opposite, actually) but because it's something I've tried to keep track of as part of that community and being online for most of my life. Even terms that were previously accepted by the trans community (transsexual, for instance) are now seen as slurs. It's hard to keep up with, and everyone has their own personal preferences, so I can 100% understand why CCs wouldn't want their stuff tagged with something they don't personally agree with, especially if the CC themselves is part of the trans community.

There was actually some CC I was watching here that made a new word for non-binary body configurations not too long ago. It was very useful. I will see if I can find it.

2. I think this is just because tags are publicly viewable and if you have a lot of them, it looks kinda cramped and seems unnecessary. Maybe just a button that says "show tags" would solve this.

3 & 4. This fits into 1. But also someone made an example with micro and macro and vore. They don't want people to find their art through the vore tag because they don't draw vore, but some of the art can be misleading and seem like vore at times. The CC doesn't want to be associated with that and doesn't want to attract watchers/users who may be expecting more vore-y images in the future.

EDIT:
Found it!
"Altersex"
https://www.weasyl.com/journal/90896/altersex-body-descriptor-and-alternative-to-fetish-terms

Swanda
08-21-2015, 05:59 AM
I think that this line of discussion requires consideration of which tags submitters don't want to see. I made a post about it earlier, but I didn't see anyone reply to it yet: https://forums.weasyl.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?7738-Community-Tagging-Overview&p=89870&viewfull=1#post89870

You can say "a submitter doesn't want their art defined as {some tag} and that should be their choice", but I want to understand why. To me, it seems that when you consider the actual specific cases (instead of handwaving which tags make submitters uncomfortable), most of the issues are easily resolvable without having to give the submitter the final say.

Of course, I'm still definitely in favor of allowing submitters (or anyone else) to report a tag or tag suggestion or whatever.

I honestly don’t know how to explain this to you if you don’t understand by now, despite so many people trying to make it crystal clear. I guess the most boiled down to the point I can get it is that art is a personal experience.
And quite a few artists see their art some something very personal, even if it's just a simple pin up. Having someone else barge in and actively redefining your art is super invasive at best. Even if the art was only searchable by said tag for a few hours, it can still feel very violating to some.
At this point all I can say is that you don’t need to understand it to respect it.
And the long and short of it is that other people's ability to find CC’s art should not outweigh CC’s comfort. If it does you will keep seeing people leave over it.

Sometimes a CC don't want their art tagged as, let's say, “Anus” simply because they felt like adding a * as a minor non focus point detail. And that is okay.

“Anus” isn’t a gender tag, so no help for CC to remove it there.

It's not a Synonym either, so no help for CC to remove it there.

It is an Accurate tag in this case, just highly unimportant. Yet a voting by the community would most likely deem it accurate and the tag would get locked onto CC’s art.
Tough luck I guess.

It’s not really a word CC dislike either, so it wasn’t added to a “Do not add to this submission, list. It’s just very redundant and an eyesore, and maybe they would rather not have people finding this submission through searches for “Anus” as well.

Tough luck tho, it is now force locked onto their submission by the community.
The only option now is to report the tag and waste staff's time with it.
However; staff would most likely not removed it for CC, since it's not offensive nor inaccurate, and they don’t appear to care to understand CC’s feelings on the matter either.

And quite honestly most CC’s have WAY better things to do with their life than wait on replies from staff over tag removals, that should never, ever have been locked in the first place. You know things like watching paint dry, or grass grow.

In all seriousness if you started locking tags on submissions by default in any way, I would for the first time consider leaving. I’ve always been kinda unhappy with the community tagging, but I also recognize the value of it. I also feel it could become a Really good thing for the site in the long run and with the right improvements. Removing CC’s ability to remove tags is not one of the right ones.


Imo, the right ones would include:

Associated tags - There you go by adding "Housecats", you also by association added “Housecat” “Cat” “Cats” “Feline” Felines”. So many new searches you would be found by!

Anonymous tagging - Honestly I don’t understand why it wasn’t made like that from the start.

Tag approval by CC - With the option to turn it off.

The option to turn off tag notifications.

Tags disapproved by CC shouldn't be able to be requested again.

Tags separated differently, and allowing for copy pasting a long string of tags.

Hidden tags that would get picked up by the Block but not the search filter.
Hiding them under a “Read hidden tags” button or something to that effect would be an oookay compromise I guess.

Maybe an overall tag history page, where CC’s can go see recent tag changes to all their submissions in the same info stream.

More information on Why tagging is So important on Weasyl, and what the consequences of poor and inaccurate tagging would be. Along with a guide on how to tag your art well.
That the community tagging is a thing and why it is a thing.
How best to get this information to users Idk. Since people hate reading. But this is just so hella important

A community guideline on how to tag other people's submissions.
Basically creating a tagging outline, with what the goals for the community tagging are.
Such as - Don’t go with a tag what you see approach.
Maybe have people read through this before they are even given the option to tag others submissions.

And a last random though:
Maybe allow CC’s to pick between a few options of:
Only add block-fliter tags please.
Tag away.
Wreck me! (tag what you see I don’t care)
Either on all submissions by default or per submission, and then have a visual representation of CC’s choice at the tags.
Maybe have CC’s read through the “Why tagging is so important on Weasyl” info before allowing them the option for “Only Blocked tags”.

armaina
08-21-2015, 06:47 AM
Edit: Oh please give us an easy way to tag characters! something like "socksthefox:Jade" where the colon both tells the system it's a character tag as well as separate the owner and character (i.e. maybe a person would want to search for all art involving my characters they'd search "owner:socksthefox". They wouldn't even have to be registered on the site since it's just tags. I'm laffin cus I LITERALLY just made that same exact suggestion in the post before yours

WE REALLY NEED UNIQUE CREATOR DESIGNATION FORMATTING!! It'd be awesome because we would be the only site that had anything like that at all.

Fiz
08-21-2015, 07:41 AM
Okay, there's no need to delve into personal attacks here. Knock it off.


Anyway, this is an idea I threw to staff a while ago and it seemed to be well liked enough, so I'll repeat it here.

Being able to per-emptively reject certain tags per submission, with the amount of rejectable tags being equal to the amount of tags that the uploader places on the submission. This would mean that hopefully, people would start tagging better and would also let people auto-reject tags they already know they don't want.

Example: You post an image and it's tagged transgender, cheetah, feline. You already know you want to auto-reject the terms "herm" and "leopard", so you put those on the auto-reject list. It would also leave you for one space for another auto-rejected tag if you think of one later on.


The major problem I see with this one is people putting in gibberish tags just to block a lot of tags, but hopefully people would report gibberish tags to us. It'd also work well with having an approved community tag listing system that some of you described a while back (where if a certain tag is used enough, it gets automatically turned into an approved tag. helps keep from gibberish tags being used).



I think such a system could be used in congruent with a "global tag banlist" sort of thing that I mentioned a while ago (a global tag list that holds terms that only the uploader or staff can add to a submission, which would probably include the tag 'herm' anyways but I digress), as well as a system where if you've already removed a community tag off of a submission, it can't be readded except by you or staff. All of those systems used together would basically mean:

1. Majorly cut down the possibility of abusive tags (which is already rare to start with)
2. Less possibility of edit wars if a tag is removed by user, meaning it's now set to auto-reject
3. Give users power to automatically get rid of tags they know for certain they don't want

While still allowing community tagging to be a thing.

Swanda
08-21-2015, 08:01 AM
Being able to per-emptively reject certain tags per submission, with the amount of rejectable tags being equal to the amount of tags that the uploader places on the submission. This would mean that hopefully, people would start tagging better and would also let people auto-reject tags they already know they don't want.


Aside from potential gibberish tags the only problem I see with this idea, is that it could be a blow to the block filtering. I don't think it'll be a huge issue, but the risk is there, so eh.
It should not be a stand alone thing tho, this addition isn't enough in itself.

piñardilla
08-21-2015, 08:04 AM
I feel like that just adds a completely unnecessary middle step.

You could just allow CCs to approve/disapprove all tags, and any disapproved tag might be checked by a Ferret at that point (if you wanted ferrets again)

Also workable. It's just an idea, so the details of the process can be reworked until it fits. I felt that Ferret pre-clearance of tags might make CCs more comfortable with the idea of permitting community tagging in the first place. It could also help us enforce some standards in tagging, possibly.

As for Swanda's point, I still personally don't get why CCs wouldn't want an accurate tag to show. But perhaps a good compromise within this proposed idea is for CCs to get an "Approve/Reject/Hide" prompt on tag notifications? The difference between Reject and Hide in this case would be that Ferrets wouldn't receive a rejection notification for Hidden tags, and they would still continue to function for blacklisting.

There could be some awkwardness when people keep trying to add tags that are already hidden, so they might ultimately not end up being truly invisible, but require clicking through to the tag editing prompt to actually see them or something.

Swanda
08-21-2015, 08:14 AM
is for CCs to get an "Approve/Reject/Hide" prompt on tag notifications?


Oh I like this! This would be great for an CC approval prompt, no matter how it was implemented!

Fiz
08-21-2015, 08:16 AM
Aside from potential gibberish tags the only problem I see with this idea, is that it could be a blow to the block filtering. I don't think it'll be a huge issue, but the risk is there, so eh.
It should not be a stand alone thing tho, this addition isn't enough in itself.

It'd need to be a system used in congruent with other things, like I said with my post, for sure. On it's own it's likely not enough.

Like I said, used together with a global-tag auto-reject list that would likely contain stuff like slurs/offensive terms, gendered terms etc, it'd massively cut down the chance of possible abusive tagging and misgendering tagging, as well as give users control on default if they already know some terms they don't want added.


I'd also like blacklist by username (well by userid rather) for people who you know you don't want to see the art of for whatever reason, but don't want to put on your ignore list.

Socks the Fox
08-21-2015, 10:42 AM
Another thing I think would help is fixing a CC's reluctance to get staff involved. This isn't FA, people! The staff here actually answer reports! If you tag something "trans_female" and someone keeps adding the "male" tag even though you've explained it both in the description and to them individually, go right ahead and report them! The staff WILL say "hey stop that you're being a butt" and take action as needed. The report form gives you this nice big box where you can type all you want to your heart's content to explain why you don't want this tag, but even a quick one-liner "hey this person keeps tagging this male even though the character's trans and I've tagged it trans" would work.

Edit:

I'm laffin cus I LITERALLY just made that same exact suggestion in the post before yours

Hence my edit :P

Fiz
08-21-2015, 10:56 AM
Another thing I think would help is fixing a CC's reluctance to get staff involved. This isn't FA, people! The staff here actually answer reports! If you tag something "trans_female" and someone keeps adding the "male" tag even though you've explained it both in the description and to them individually, go right ahead and report them! The staff WILL say "hey stop that you're being a butt" and take action as needed. The report form gives you this nice big box where you can type all you want to your heart's content to explain why you don't want this tag, but even a quick one-liner "hey this person keeps tagging this male even though the character's trans and I've tagged it trans" would work.


Agreeing with everything you said.

We could use some tinkering to the report system. Just a general "report user" would work well for this I think.

DrunkCat
08-21-2015, 12:17 PM
Before I go on one final rant I just feel the need to emphasize the statistics reported by the admins about how tag abuse is nearly a non-existent issue. I still see folks use this as a scare tactic and it boggles my mind how it keeps coming up despite information to the contrary.
--

At any rate, being exasperated at the fact that opposition to community tagging amounts to culture shock (e.g. "Even if the tags are appropriate it's awful because it's not me doing it!") I'm going to just attempt to flesh out the tag suggestion set idea.

Tags will be consolidated. It will just be "tags" for each piece. No "artists tags", "community tags" or "staff tags" distinctions.

Each piece will have a section that will list out suggested tags for the piece. What feeds the suggestions can be open to debate but ideas include:

Tags previously used in artists other works
Derivative tags (e.g. cat == feline == kitten == cats == felis == ...)
'Similiar' tags (e.g. cat == animal == pet == ...)


The set itself can be a mixture of already established tags, suggested tags and maybe just random tags. (i.e. 3 established, 6 suggested, 1 random).

Each regular user gets to select up to 3 tags. Artists (i.e. the content creator) can select an unlimited amount. CC can also be allowed free-form additions of tags (if said feature was disallowed to users).

Each tag is weighted by selection. Users have a +1 weight and the CC a +100 weight. This could allow for an 'organic' ferret program where those users who have a lot of tag selections under their belt without incident can carry a +10 weight with their selections.

The weights on tags can influence order of tags for a piece and also relevance to keywords when searching. Tags can be flagged or reported and users can be penalized by either reduced weight (if the weight numbers are different) or outright ban.

--

I think it's great that Weasyl is trying something 'radically' new. I feel that this feature is something that needs full support and can only work if done without hindrance. There are plenty of other websites that do it the "normal" way, so why force Weasyl to be another brick in the wall? What does it matter if a few artists drop out in the initial roll out of a feature; there are other sites that cause mass emigrations every full moon yet are still going strong. Who knows, maybe something like this will allow for more diversity into the site.

All I know is that it's silly to judge Weasyl against websites that you don't even like to begin with. There's opportunity here to experiment and I think it'd be great to seize it in full.

blufawx
08-21-2015, 01:04 PM
I honestly don’t know how to explain this to you if you don’t understand by now, despite so many people trying to make it crystal clear. I guess the most boiled down to the point I can get it is that art is a personal experience.
And quite a few artists see their art some something very personal, even if it's just a simple pin up. Having someone else barge in and actively redefining your art is super invasive at best. Even if the art was only searchable by said tag for a few hours, it can still feel very violating to some.
At this point all I can say is that you don’t need to understand it to respect it.
And the long and short of it is that other people's ability to find CC’s art should not outweigh CC’s comfort. If it does you will keep seeing people leave over it.

This is what I've been saying...just not as articulate.


Sometimes a CC don't want their art tagged as, let's say, “Anus” simply because they felt like adding a * as a minor non focus point detail. And that is okay.

“Anus” isn’t a gender tag, so no help for CC to remove it there.

It's not a Synonym either, so no help for CC to remove it there.

It is an Accurate tag in this case, just highly unimportant. Yet a voting by the community would most likely deem it accurate and the tag would get locked onto CC’s art.
Tough luck I guess.

It’s not really a word CC dislike either, so it wasn’t added to a “Do not add to this submission, list. It’s just very redundant and an eyesore, and maybe they would rather not have people finding this submission through searches for “Anus” as well.

Tough luck tho, it is now force locked onto their submission by the community.
The only option now is to report the tag and waste staff's time with it.
However; staff would most likely not removed it for CC, since it's not offensive nor inaccurate, and they don’t appear to care to understand CC’s feelings on the matter either.

And quite honestly most CC’s have WAY better things to do with their life than wait on replies from staff over tag removals, that should never, ever have been locked in the first place. You know things like watching paint dry, or grass grow.

In all seriousness if you started locking tags on submissions by default in any way, I would for the first time consider leaving. I’ve always been kinda unhappy with the community tagging, but I also recognize the value of it. I also feel it could become a Really good thing for the site in the long run and with the right improvements. Removing CC’s ability to remove tags is not one of the right ones.

This is hilarious. You're saying everything I've been saying. I've just kept it simple as the viewer gets more power than the CC. I'd pull a Kayne and say Weasyl hates CCs but that's just silly.


Tag approval by CC - With the option to turn it off.

again, I've been saying community tagging should be opt-out at this point. It should have been opt-in from the beginning, but apparently weasyl doesn't like CCs having control over their art.

Swanda
08-21-2015, 02:21 PM
This is what I've been saying...just not as articulate.

This is hilarious. You're saying everything I've been saying. I've just kept it simple as the viewer gets more power than the CC. I'd pull a Kayne and say Weasyl hates CCs but that's just silly.

again, I've been saying community tagging should be opt-out at this point. It should have been opt-in from the beginning, but apparently weasyl doesn't like CCs having control over their art.

Well I have said that I understand where you're coming from, the thing that didn't agree with me was the very aggressive attitude.

I have however also understood and accepted the fact that staff isn't going to remove the community tagging, nor allow a complete opt-out. In fact the opt-out sits bad with me at this point since I use the tag blocking and I'm very happy that it is a thing! I am now trying to help figure out a way for the community tagging to be improved so it will make as many people feel comfortable and happy with it as possible.

So yeah, I think you misunderstood the last quote; "Tag approval by CC - With the option to turn it off."
It's meant as a system to allow CC's to approve tags before they are added. And the option to turn this system off, meaning all tags would be auto accepted. Since some people really don't care and prompts to accept/Decline tags would be more of an annoyance for them.

But how would you feel about this suggestion I posed before?


And a last random thought:
Maybe allow CC’s to pick between a few options of:
- Only add block-fliter tags please.
- Tag away.
- Wreck me! (tag what you see I don’t care)
Either on all submissions by default or per submission, and then have a visual representation of CC’s choice at the tags.


So that with the "Only add block-fliter tags please." people would know only to suggest "invisible tags" for block filtering.
With the Invisible tags not being immediately visible on your submission, nor would your submission appear in searches for said tag. It would Only be picked up by the block filtering.

I know it’s not entirely what you are hoping for, but this way you would at least retain as much power over your tags as possible, without disregarding the people who want to block things they aren't comfortable watching.

blufawx
08-21-2015, 02:25 PM
But how would you feel about this suggestion I posed before?



So that with the "Only add block-fliter tags please." people would know only to suggest "invisible tags" for block filtering.
With the Invisible tags not being immediately visible on your submission, nor would your submission appear in searches for said tag. It would Only be picked up by the block filtering.

I know it’s not entirely what you are hoping for, but this way you would at least retain as much power over your tags as possible, without disregarding the people who want to block things they aren't comfortable watching.

I'm really not okay with it.

but

I guess it's as good as it'd get without completely deleting my weasyl account and never coming to this site again.

Edit: oh, wait. i can't do that. because weasyl doesn't have a disable or delete account feature that even FA has. yet they have this STUPID feature.

CosmicRose
08-21-2015, 04:53 PM
I'll go ahead and share my input about this.

I will say first that I do see how this can be culture shock to some people. A lot of people from my impression jumped ship to Weasyl in hope that it will be better than the other art sites that have constantly let them down. But Weasyl is not a carbon copy of those sites. They are trying something different and are open to feedback and I appreciate how open the staff are with this. They want to improve their site and make it user friendly for all CCs and viewers. They want to make this work.

However, I also understand the concerns that CCs do have with community tagging. It does feel like it gives more power to the viewers to be able to tag what they think they see. But art is subjective and personal to many, if not all. So it does seem invasive to tag content as one thing when the CC did not intend for it to be that. However, that can be remedied by having CCs approve of the tags that are appropriate for their work. And when you deny a tag, it should not be added to the submission again unless a mod intervenes. That can be handy because for me personally I have no idea what tags to use that will give me the most exposure. So a little help from the community can be beneficial if you're looking to get your work out there.

It can be easy to disable community tagging altogether but then it gets a little complicated. Blacklisting and trigger warnings. Some people may feel that it's unnecessary and people need to suck up and deal with what they see online but that's an insensitive way to look at it. We have become more aware about these things and how people are greatly affected by what triggers them. And people are taking the extra step further to make certain people can safely search for artwork without being triggered or uncomfortable with certain content. It's not being overly sensitive or politically correct; it's being considerate of others who struggle to deal with traumatic events. Hidden tags that are picked up only for blacklisting purposes does seem plausible but I can also see how it takes away from the CC's power. It is a hard thing to balance out.

But by the end of the day you can't please everybody. There is no one perfect site for everybody to go to. It is ultimately up to the majority of the community to come to an agreement on what will work. Communication is extremely important in figuring out what is good and what isn't. You have to make do with what's given to you.

So for me, I'm all for an approval process for community tags. Giving me the option to approve of what tags are suggested for my work is great for me. It will also help with weeding out the potentially abusive and inappropriate tags. If the CC can catch them during the approval process then it evens out. You can then also disable the approval process so the tags are auto accepted if that's your preference too. If it can work then I'm okay with hidden tags exclusively for blacklisting purposes.

EDIT: Another thing I forgot to bring up that I'm okay with are banned tags. Having a list of inappropriate and offensive tags not to use is also beneficial.

BlueJaySF
08-21-2015, 05:03 PM
Each tag is weighted by selection. Users have a +1 weight and the CC a +100 weight. This could allow for an 'organic' ferret program where those users who have a lot of tag selections under their belt without incident can carry a +10 weight with their selections.

The weights on tags can influence order of tags for a piece and also relevance to keywords when searching. Tags can be flagged or reported and users can be penalized by either reduced weight (if the weight numbers are different) or outright ban.

I don't see the sense in this.

weykent
08-21-2015, 05:48 PM
I don't see the sense in this.

Perhaps you could elaborate on what you think the problem is.

armaina
08-21-2015, 05:55 PM
I still do think there needs to be an opt-out. It's like I said before and the thing that keeps getting missed
Not allowing CC to optout while also having no restrictions on who gets to add, seems to say that you don't trust a CC to tag their work appropriately. Give them that trust, it will work for the site's benefit.

Also a thought - for the people that use gibberish tags, why not also have just a search opt out as well, as this is likely why people are using gibbersh tags in the first place. That way they can use the tags for their watcher's to filter without having to worry about the tag being used to find the art. some people are quite comfortable /not/ being searchable and would often prefer it.

weykent
08-21-2015, 06:00 PM
I honestly don’t know how to explain this to you if you don’t understand by now, despite so many people trying to make it crystal clear. I guess the most boiled down to the point I can get it is that art is a personal experience.
And quite a few artists see their art some something very personal, even if it's just a simple pin up. Having someone else barge in and actively redefining your art is super invasive at best. Even if the art was only searchable by said tag for a few hours, it can still feel very violating to some.

It's not redefining the art, though. Is that what you feel the issue is: tags are supposed to reflect the submitter's "focus" on a piece?


Sometimes a CC don't want their art tagged as, let's say, “Anus” simply because they felt like adding a * as a minor non focus point detail. And that is okay.

“Anus” isn’t a gender tag, so no help for CC to remove it there.

It's not a Synonym either, so no help for CC to remove it there.

It is an Accurate tag in this case, just highly unimportant. Yet a voting by the community would most likely deem it accurate and the tag would get locked onto CC’s art.
Tough luck I guess.

It’s not really a word CC dislike either, so it wasn’t added to a “Do not add to this submission, list. It’s just very redundant and an eyesore, and maybe they would rather not have people finding this submission through searches for “Anus” as well.

Tough luck tho, it is now force locked onto their submission by the community.
The only option now is to report the tag and waste staff's time with it.
However; staff would most likely not removed it for CC, since it's not offensive nor inaccurate, and they don’t appear to care to understand CC’s feelings on the matter either.

This seems to be more of the same thing. Are you suggesting that the reason someone wouldn't want an "anus" tag is because it's not the focus of the piece? It's not clear to me why a submitter would object to someone finding a submission based on an exposed anus.

I guess maybe it's partially another thing: maybe some submitters don't want genitalia tagged because they feel the focus of the piece isn't sexual. In that case, perhaps tags could be allowed/disallowed per rating. It would make sense to disallow e.g. "anus" in non-18+ submissions anyway. I've long thought about making ratings based on the presence or absence of certain tags.

Really, though, overall I'm unconvinced that someone could want to avoid community tagging for any reason other than "there are certain types of tags I don't want to appear on my submissions". Discussing what those types of tags are and the problem with their presence is going to be more fruitful than throwing up our figurative hands and saying "the mind of a submitter is an unfathomable enigma".

- - - Updated - - -

Oh, also, another thing I was thinking about earlier today. Since weasyl allows for you/by you posting, theoretically speaking, who should have the final say in what tags a submission has: the artist, or the commissioner(s)? Any of these people can post it to their profile. The danger of saying "whoever submitted it has the final say on that submission" is that commissioners often link to the artist, and so theoretically a commissioner could add a tag that the artist finds distasteful (e.g. "vore" or "anus").

- - - Updated - - -


Also a thought - for the people that use gibberish tags, why not also have just a search opt out as well, as this is likely why people are using gibbersh tags in the first place. That way they can use the tags for their watcher's to filter without having to worry about the tag being used to find the art. some people are quite comfortable /not/ being searchable and would often prefer it.

There's been a few posts about this before, but at that point, why is the submitter using weasyl at all? This is a community art site, not a private image archive.

blufawx
08-21-2015, 06:25 PM
Oh, also, another thing I was thinking about earlier today. Since weasyl allows for you/by you posting, theoretically speaking, who should have the final say in what tags a submission has: the artist, or the commissioner(s)?

Yes.

You're talking about two separate pages, two separate people. The only way the two become the same is if a community user
sees the page of the commissioner with one set of tags and the artist with another then adds the commissioner's tags to the artist submission which is exactly the problem with community tagging--it gives too much power to the community and not enough to the person that did the art AND the person that commissioned it.

Which is why I've been saying that community tagging is a stupid waste of time for all involved.

BlueJaySF
08-21-2015, 06:46 PM
Perhaps you could elaborate on what you think the problem is.

The problem is that what he's suggesting is barely comprehensible. It's like something taken from the middle of a conversation with no preamble for others to use as a frame of reference.

weykent
08-21-2015, 07:02 PM
Yes.

You're talking about two separate pages, two separate people. The only way the two become the same is if a community user
sees the page of the commissioner with one set of tags and the artist with another then adds the commissioner's tags to the artist submission which is exactly the problem with community tagging--it gives too much power to the community and not enough to the person that did the art AND the person that commissioned it.

Which is why I've been saying that community tagging is a stupid waste of time for all involved.

Well,


The danger of saying "whoever submitted it has the final say on that submission" is that commissioners often link to the artist, and so theoretically a commissioner could add a tag that the artist finds distasteful (e.g. "vore" or "anus").

blufawx
08-21-2015, 07:12 PM
Well,

Sorry, it didn't include that part of your quote in a quote.

and that would be a problem for the artist and the commissioner to hash out. Still has nothing to do with the community beyond two people.

So that's still a point in my favor.


What I've noticed is that any time someone shows why community tagging is bad, or doesn't work you automatically come with a pseudopoint to supposedly counter it. It makes me question whether staff really care or if this thread was set up to placate patronize. an "everything is okay! see? we care!" but then nothing gets done anyway.

ganache
08-21-2015, 08:20 PM
Really, though, overall I'm unconvinced that someone could want to avoid community tagging for any reason other than "there are certain types of tags I don't want to appear on my submissions". Discussing what those types of tags are and the problem with their presence is going to be more fruitful than throwing up our figurative hands and saying "the mind of a submitter is an unfathomable enigma".

- - - Updated - - -

Oh, also, another thing I was thinking about earlier today. Since weasyl allows for you/by you posting, theoretically speaking, who should have the final say in what tags a submission has: the artist, or the commissioner(s)? Any of these people can post it to their profile. The danger of saying "whoever submitted it has the final say on that submission" is that commissioners often link to the artist, and so theoretically a commissioner could add a tag that the artist finds distasteful (e.g. "vore" or "anus").

- - - Updated - - -

Who has final say on commission's use and display (and categorization in this case, I guess) is a different box of worms, since it depends on the artist's TOS when the commission was taken. Tagging isn't a common thing outlined in people's terms by a longshot, but if I had to say "control" leaned one way or the other, it's the artist's.

I can see reason for both parties at least discussing tags if the piece is to be collected. Or reposted and tagged as the commissioner wants, if that's allowed alternately.

I don't disagree that digging into this further clarifies some things, but the proposals I've seen (and bring up next) seem so much simpler to implement without having to go 20 questions on everyone that I don't get why it's happening, frankly.

For what it's worth, pre-approval of tags so much as existing (maybe with the default behavior being to let them come in freely and behave as they already do) + search exclusion possibilities have been my favorite solutions presented and I just hope they're possible. /throws up hands

armaina
08-21-2015, 08:50 PM
There's been a few posts about this before, but at that point, why is the submitter using weasyl at all? This is a community art site, not a private image archive. seriously? Maybe because they want to interact with a select few members on the site and not the entire site. (never mind that it's not removing oneself from search means that no one will ever find them. Fave surfing anyone?) We already have a friends feature or is that something you don't think should exist either?


Really, though, overall I'm unconvinced that someone could want to avoid community tagging for any reason other than "there are certain types of tags I don't want to appear on my submissions". And I'm convinced that the only reason you're slamming opt-out tagging is because you, personally, do not like it and are otherwise insulted by the notion.

You really shouldn't be asking the community what it would like if all you're going to do is respond in a manner that condescends based on what you think the site should be. If you want community feedback, at least acknowledge why someone would want the features they're asking rather than implying they're useless.

weykent
08-21-2015, 08:50 PM
<snip>

Oops I'd typed up a long reply but you deleted the bits I was replying to.

Part of the reason I want to understand about the specific cases people care to avoid is because to me, ideally, submitter tags and community tags would be completely separate logical groups, and that the submitter can't add/remove community tags, and the community can't add/remove submitter tags. It might take a while before there's enough buy-in to really support it, but understanding the actual objections to this helps refine the ideal implementation.

- - - Updated - - -


seriously? Maybe because they want to interact with a select few members on the site and not the entire site. (never mind that it's not removing oneself from search means that no one will ever find them. Fave surfing anyone?) We already have a friends feature or is that something you don't think should exist either?

There's been some discussion (though just on IRC, I think?) about having private groups for posting these things. I certainly don't think that limiting exposure is inherently a problem, but you seemed to be referring to people who were posting only for themselves.


And I'm convinced that the only reason you're slamming opt-out tagging is because you, personally, do not like it and are otherwise insulted by the notion.

You really shouldn't be asking the community what it would like if all you're going to do is respond in a manner that condescends based on what you think the site should be. If you want community feedback, at least acknowledge why someone would want the features they're asking rather than implying they're useless.

I'm not sure what I've posted that you feel is condescending. Clearly some people feel very strongly about this issue, but I've been trying to get people to actually explain what it is they actually care about. It seems almost like the XY problem (http://xyproblem.info):


You want to do X, but don't know how. You think you can solve it using Y, but don't know how to do that, either. You ask about Y, which is a strange thing to want to do. Just ask about X.

In this particular case, it seems to me that the X is the something that submitters want to get or not get out of tagging, but community tagging gets conflated in with that, and then we only end up talking about community tagging instead.

DrunkCat
08-21-2015, 09:13 PM
It seems almost like the XY problem (http://xyproblem.info)

If folks are confusing tagging with being something integral or part of the submission itself (i.e. like a title) then it is an XY problem.

If you're a rock group it does no one an iota of good to be filed under "Jazz" or "Pop". The label "rock" has nothing to do nor affects at any level the sound of the music. It could be labeled "Rap" and it'd still sound the same (but will certainly confuse a lot of people).

armaina
08-21-2015, 09:20 PM
I'm not sure what I've posted that you feel is condescending. Clearly some people feel very strongly about this issue, but I've been trying to get people to actually explain what it is they actually care about.The quote I used is exactly what reads as condescending 'I'm not convinced it's important therefore I don't see why it should be used'. Even if that was not what you meant, that is how it is read.

Multiple users have tried to explain why they would like that feature. Even if there is evidence to support that vandalism and generally unwanted tagging is very low, just saying that will not suddenly make a user not afraid of that. The ability to turn off public tagging means a sigh of relief the user can breath, never having to worry about getting a notification of tags of things they really did not want to see that day, in their notifications. This means comfort for you as staff and comfort for the user. I cannot stress enough how important that is.

And as I said before, twice now, it's also about what you are passively saying about your artists by denying even the possibility of the feature. You are saying to them 'we do not trust you to tag your own submissions appropriately, so you HAVE to let the community fill the gaps, or else'. You may not be saying that with words but that is what the intention is. Tell me, what is it that you fear about adding the ability to opt out. What exactly is it that you loose because I genuinely don't see how Weasyl would be less of a site for it, it's not like 90% of the userbase is going to opt out just because the feature is there. Heck, some artists will actively want their users to fill in the blanks. Also, remember that just because someone opts out, does not mean they won't opt back in somewhere down the line.

Have a little faith in your users, please. If you have faith that most of the userbase will not abuse the community tagging system and you are expecting everyone else to share that faith, then you need to have a little faith that the people that opt out of it won't abuse it as well.

weykent
08-21-2015, 09:30 PM
Multiple users have tried to explain why they would like that feature. Even if there is evidence to support that vandalism and generally unwanted tagging is very low, just saying that will not suddenly make a user not afraid of that. The ability to turn off public tagging means a sigh of relief the user can breath, never having to worry about getting a notification of tags of things they really did not want to see that day, in their notifications. This means comfort for you as staff and comfort for the user. I cannot stress enough how important that is.

While this thread is about community tagging, do you also feel that submitters should be able to disable comments, notes, and shouts, for the same reason? All of these have the same abuse potential. This is what I'm saying about the XY problem: this is not specific to community tagging, and yet I haven't seen anyone in the thread say that all forms of community interaction should be able to be turned off.


And as I said before, twice now, it's also about what you are passively saying about your artists by denying even the possibility of the feature. You are saying to them 'we do not trust you to tag your own submissions appropriately, so you HAVE to let the community fill the gaps, or else'. You may not be saying that with words but that is what the intention is. Tell me, what is it that you fear about adding the ability to opt out. What exactly is it that you loose because I genuinely don't see how Weasyl would be less of a site for it, it's not like 90% of the userbase is going to opt out just because the feature is there. Heck, some artists will actively want their users to fill in the blanks. Also, remember that just because someone opts out, does not mean they won't opt back in somewhere down the line.

Have a little faith in your users, please. If you have faith that most of the userbase will not abuse the community tagging system and you are expecting everyone else to share that faith, then you need to have a little faith that the people that opt out of it won't abuse it as well.

I, and other users, have expressed interest in the ability to filter out unwanted content. While at least one other person has said "the comfort of the artist should be put above the comfort of the rest of the community", I'm curious how you stand on that.

At least part of the issue comes from the combination of wanting to filter out unwanted content, while simultaneously trying to appease submitters who believe that their two tags are enough, and no more should be added, and submitters who feel that, while a tag might accurately describe the content, it's not what they feel the focus of the submission is, and therefore it should be omitted.

armaina
08-21-2015, 09:43 PM
While this thread is about community tagging, do you also feel that submitters should be able to disable comments, notes, and shouts, for the same reason? All of these have the same abuse potential. This is what I'm saying about the XY problem: this is not specific to community tagging, and yet I haven't seen anyone in the thread say that all forms of community interaction should be able to be turned off. Yes, I do. In fact I wonder why we haven't had that option yet, even DA has it.


I, and other users, have expressed interest in the ability to filter out unwanted content. While at least one other person has said "the comfort of the artist should be put above the comfort of the rest of the community", I'm curious how you stand on that.

At least part of the issue comes from the combination of wanting to filter out unwanted content, while simultaneously trying to appease submitters who believe that their two tags are enough, and no more should be added, and submitters who feel that, while a tag might accurately describe the content, it's not what they feel the focus of the submission is, and therefore it should be omitted. As I said before, you are already, right now, assuming, that every single person that uses opt out will out right refuse to tag their works with black-listable tags or will turn down any request to do so. The possibility of that happening is just as infrequent as the possibility of tag vandalism, not more, not less. Adding opt-out will not cause a problem, as that problem already exists in users that adamantly remove tags anyway they will exist whether or not you add an opt-out feature and staff will have to deal with them whether or not there is an opt-out feature. so this boogyman stance that someone who opts out might, not listen to blacklist requests, doesn't actually do anything to prove why opt-out is fundamentally bad.

From what I've seen both in thread and off site is this:
If there is no opt-out, you will loose users and there will be no change in work for staff
If you add opt-out you will keep those users and there will be no change in work for staff

This is an art site, not a dating website, not a face book style social network.
Without artists you don't have a community so yes, their comfort is paramount.

blufawx
08-21-2015, 09:49 PM
Every time weykent posts, and every time I read it, I'm more and more convinced that they don't care, that this was set up just to placate people and that weykent is simply playing devil's advocate to make appear as though weasyl and staff care.

Multiple people, multiple times, sometimes even the same person (and not just me) multiple times, have tried to explain to you why something should be a certain way, or what they see. And you just dismiss it with a wave of your hand and a condescending sniff of the air (if this were real life anyway.)

The very fact that you and other users have said unless you like xx, you shouldn't be here smacks of elitism and "do things our way or else." which makes for a very chilling environment alone.

not everyone wants public tagging. Some people are here to interact with a few friends. I know that I joined because a few friends were here, keyword were then I stuck around because i thought the site was nice. Shame on me for thinking that way.

In the mean time, since I've posted in this thread, I had a piece removed, given a warning and generally told just to leave. I'd delete my account completely with that attitude both from staff and members here...but oops weasyl doesn't have give an option to disable it.

weykent
08-21-2015, 09:57 PM
As I said before, you are already, right now, assuming, that every single person that uses opt out will out right refuse to tag their works with black-listable tags or will turn down any request to do so. The possibility of that happening is just as infrequent as the possibility of tag vandalism, not more, not less. Adding opt-out will not cause a problem, as that problem already exists in users that adamantly remove tags anyway they will exist whether or not you add an opt-out feature and staff will have to deal with them whether or not there is an opt-out feature. so this boogyman stance that someone who opts out might, not listen to blacklist requests, doesn't actually do anything to prove why opt-out is fundamentally bad.

Er, no? In even just this thread there are more than three users who have posted saying that they don't want anyone adding any tags to any of their submissions. I'm not talking about some hypothetical possibility; this is something that is happening now, and happening more frequently than abusive tags ever did.

Yes, adding opt-out will not make this problem worse, but it also doesn't make this problem better.


This is an art site, not a dating website, not a face book style social network.
Without artists you don't have a community so yes, their comfort is paramount.

I do agree with you that content creators are a critical component of the community, but I feel I should also point out that users are also allowed to submit works that were created by someone else.

blufawx
08-21-2015, 10:08 PM
Yes, adding opt-out will not make this problem worse, but it also doesn't make this problem better.

To quote a user here,


Perhaps you could elaborate on why you think this

DrunkCat
08-21-2015, 10:08 PM
Without artists you don't have a community so yes, their comfort is paramount.

Without a community you don't have artists.

blufawx
08-21-2015, 10:23 PM
Without a community you don't have artists.

Not true at all.

Did Picasso paint because of a community? or because he was an artist?

You're told, as a writer, to write for yourself not your audience.


You just proved my point for me, though, so thank you--this is about the viewer gaining more power than the content creator.

arinaca
08-21-2015, 10:24 PM
Curious - for those wanting to opt-out of tagging, would you be comfortable still having community tags as long as you had the ability to reject them?

Tag moderators probably wouldn't even be necessary if people could moderate tags being added to their work - then those that -want- to opt out just reject everything that appears (and reporting offensive tags) and those that want tagging can approve whatever tag they deem appropriate or report any that are offensive. Sure moderators would be needed if people are being insistent about adding tags and then it could be brought up, but artists could also list somewhere on their page that they do/don't want tags, or it could even be made part of the settings to display that. It won't stop people from tagging, but you also have the ability to just... reject everything.

armaina
08-21-2015, 10:25 PM
Er, no? In even just this thread there are more than three users who have posted saying that they don't want anyone adding any tags to any of their submissions. I'm not talking about some hypothetical possibility; this is something that is happening now, and happening more frequently than abusive tags ever did.

Yes, adding opt-out will not make this problem worse, but it also doesn't make this problem better. You're.... assuming that when someone says that they also mean they will never ever make an appeal if someone requests. What they're saying is they don't want unconsented tags to show up in their notifications. Not a single person has literally said 'if someone asked me to tag this with __ so they could filter it out I totally wouldn't'. Many artists would rather be asked than it just suddenly appearing.

My point stands that you loose nothing by adding opt-out so why are you so against it. You gain trust and frankly, with how many bridges you've been burning, you're gonna need it.


Without a community you don't have artists.hahaha well last I checked artists are also community members soooooooooo

- - - Updated - - -


Curious - for those wanting to opt-out of tagging, would you be comfortable still having community tags as long as you had the ability to reject them?

Tag moderators probably wouldn't even be necessary if people could moderate tags being added to their work - then those that -want- to opt out just reject everything that appears (and reporting offensive tags) and those that want tagging can approve whatever tag they deem appropriate or report any that are offensive. Sure moderators would be needed if people are being insistent about adding tags and then it could be brought up, but artists could also list somewhere on their page that they do/don't want tags, or it could even be made part of the settings to display that. It won't stop people from tagging, but you also have the ability to just... reject everything. You can already remove tags, there are some people here that have had to remove the same tags repeatedly. Tag abuse doesn't happen often but when it does it's distressing. There have been discussions about unusable tags or specific tag blacklists per user that can't be added by community members but it just makes way more sense and is far less messy, to have a blanket opt out.

Why over-complicate something that can be solved with a single, no fuss check box.