Main Site Block/Hide user/tags content

[Cilenomon]

Basically some sort of "hide" or a better block feature.
Example: We have User_1 and User_2. User_1 decided to hide User_2 using the "hide" feature. Now, while searching / browsing art on the website, anything made by User_2 wouldn't be shown to User_1. But they could still interact with each other if needed, as they are not blocked. User_2 could also still see the picture of User_1. User_1 could still see them, but when browsing / searching, they wouldn't be there.
Also the same thing, but with tags. Yes, I know, a lot of people do not tag their stuff correctly, but atleast it's a good start

 

[Jamaldude]

I literally just made this account with the intention to suggest this exact thing...

._.

 

[Cilenomon]

I literally just made this account with the intention to suggest this exact thing...

._.

Well, it just show that this is a feature that many people want.

 

[Talu]

They should have added this a long time ago. I prefer having a setting where i can add Tags im interested in which i can save to my account and Tags that i have no interest in "a blacklist". Would make the browsing experience much better and always greeeted by art i enjoy rather a random mess of things. Wrongfully tagging things should be reportable too, gotta make tagging strict so everyone follows the rule and or, creating a guide when tagging so people can pick and chose when they submit art.

 

[Jamaldude]

They should have added this a long time ago. I prefer having a setting where i can add Tags im interested in which i can save to my account and Tags that i have no interest in "a blacklist". Would make the browsing experience much better and always greeeted by art i enjoy rather a random mess of things. Wrongfully tagging things should be reportable too, gotta make tagging strict so everyone follows the rule and or, creating a guide when tagging so people can pick and chose when they submit art.

The only issue with that is when people don't tag their artwork correctly, it would slip through. It would definitely be a good thing in addition to blocking users who don't follow those rules, but having only what you said wouldn't be enough in my opinion.

 

[quoting_mungo]

Wrongfully tagging things should be reportable too, gotta make tagging strict so everyone follows the rule and or, creating a guide when tagging so people can pick and chose when they submit art.

Adding irrelevant tags to submissions is already against the rules and has been for a long time. Go ahead and report that if you care to.

Introducing penalties for failing to add tags to work would create a humongous workload for staff (there’s over a decade of submissions on the site), especially since there’s a lot of abandoned accounts with content on them, either from artists who left the site, moved on to another account, or passed away. Even where the artist is still active on FA (on a different account), they may no longer have access to that older account. It’s strictly speaking possible, but may not be a net gain for the community given the impact it could have on older work that otherwise falls well within the rules.

 

[Cilenomon]

Tagging art correctly would, yes, be beneficial for a system like this, but we are at a point of lifetime on the website where this is far too late. At this point, it would only hurt the website, and the staff, more than it would help it. With what I'm suggesting, yes, not all the art will be caught with our blacklist, but for people (like me) that try their best to have the correct tag, it would work. And for the artist/account where it doesn't work, then you could just block them if you don't like their content. This alone will massively reduce what you don't want to see. Yes, again, some may go through the crack, but in any case, it can't be perfect no matter what we do. We can only reduce it as much as possible.

 

[Jamaldude]

I forgot to mention this, but there are a lot of different ways to say the same thing. Unless FA implemented a danbooru style system where there aren't duplicate tag names, I can only see the tag blacklist being super cluttered. It's possible for sure, but it just won't be pretty. I'd personally rather not deal with that and just block artists outright.

 

[Talu]

Well, a blacklist for certain tags would still work i think. Whats shown on the front page of browsing is newly submitted art, which can be reported if tagged wrong, some old art will pass unfortunately, but if you are looking for old art, you would have to search manually anyway.

 

[Cilenomon]

Yes again. Like I said, it's impossible to get every art to not be shown.
Although, you can reduce it A LOT just by adding that.

 

[quoting_mungo]

That's kinda the one thing - that always puzzled me, (on the main site).... is - when we block someone - but yet they can still see all of our postings / watches / and content (in spite of that).... and thus, it kind of makes the block feature, a little less effective; in my view..... and so, perhaps not only a "tag filter system" may work - but.... even a "user filter system", (where - we can keep certain users at bay, completely).... if we'd like to.

On the flip side, a lot of people use the block as an “ain’t got time for your bullshit” button, and are quite content long as they don’t have to hear from the offender again.

I personally don’t agree with the block function preventing favorites and new watches. If it’s to be more restrictive than it already is, I’d hope for a set of functions rather than a single one:

• One function to filter out a user’s content
• One function to prevent comments/shouts and mute notifications from a user (so the user can fave your content, but it doesn’t generate a “user has faved your submission”)
• One function to hide your profile and posts entirely (with the caveat that this would ultimately be a pretty ineffective function due to how easy it would be to get around and how practically impossible it would be to prove that the user had knowingly/intentionally committed block evasion)

 

[Fallowfox]

Adding irrelevant tags to submissions is already against the rules and has been for a long time. Go ahead and report that if you care to.

Introducing penalties for failing to add tags to work would create a humongous workload for staff (there’s over a decade of submissions on the site), especially since there’s a lot of abandoned accounts with content on them, either from artists who left the site, moved on to another account, or passed away. Even where the artist is still active on FA (on a different account), they may no longer have access to that older account. It’s strictly speaking possible, but may not be a net gain for the community given the impact it could have on older work that otherwise falls well within the rules.

Tagging is sometimes a semantic exercise as well. It is not strictly objective all of the time.

 

[quoting_mungo]

Tagging is sometimes a semantic exercise as well. It is not strictly objective all of the time.

Absolutely. And the tag field has a character limit (as I discovered trying to tag a Noah’s Ark illustration - not all animals got a tag in the end). Also good tagging is hard.

I tentatively like the system of having a smallish number of “canonical” fetish tags, as on Inkbunny (though I may disagree with some of their choices of tags), where those tags are “if it’s in the image you must use the tag.” That said, I don’t think it’s viable for FA, given the years of submission backlog and that the kind of people I expect to be most active in reporting lapses in mandatory tagging are people who have a chip on their shoulder towards the subject matter. At best, staff would have to deal with pissy users who don’t like the handling of their reports, whether that be in response time or ultimate decision/action passed down.

 

[Fallowfox]

Absolutely. And the tag field has a character limit (as I discovered trying to tag a Noah’s Ark illustration - not all animals got a tag in the end). Also good tagging is hard.

I tentatively like the system of having a smallish number of “canonical” fetish tags, as on Inkbunny (though I may disagree with some of their choices of tags), where those tags are “if it’s in the image you must use the tag.” That said, I don’t think it’s viable for FA, given the years of submission backlog and that the kind of people I expect to be most active in reporting lapses in mandatory tagging are people who have a chip on their shoulder towards the subject matter. At best, staff would have to deal with pissy users who don’t like the handling of their reports, whether that be in response time or ultimate decision/action passed down.

I can understand why somebody who has had an abusive experience on the past might not want to go on an online art gallery and accidentally come across art portraying abusive scenarios- so I try to extend sympathy to people who want mandatory tags.

It's a bit of a 'eat tuna get bones' scenario though, since things are going to slip through. I don't know about providing users a box to tick saying that their content doesn't include content x y and z, because it risks giving the impression that the site has a category for and specifically caters to fantasies revolving around abuse.

and then there's possible mission drift. We might all agree it's reasonable that users should be able to make sure they don't see any content with choking in for example. A lot of users might not want to see art which depicts poo as well- even though that doesn't represent a moral dilemma in the same way.

 

[quoting_mungo]

I don't know about providing users a box to tick saying that their content doesn't include content x y and z, because it risks giving the impression that the site has a category for and specifically caters to fantasies revolving around abuse.

I don’t think that has to be the implementation, mind. Like... I’ve been on FA staff, so I absolutely know that writing “if your content contains dogs, you must tag it ‘dog’” (replace “dogs” with whatever hard/problematic kink you think should have mandatory tagging) in the rules doesn’t mean people will do so. However, having such rules, and explicitly relating them back to blacklist functions, should prevent a “well clearly this is a dog art site” impression forming with most people.

This is very much a theoretical/ideological approach to the topic, though. As I’ve already said I think the ship has sailed far as introducing mandatory tagging with any kind of retroactive application on FA - and not applying it retroactively would limit its usefulness to, more or less, new content only.

 

[Cilenomon]

Thank you for your continuing support on this.
Keeping commenting and discussing about the subject means that this can stay top page and mean more chance for the admin to see it and see the oppinion of everyone.
Keep at it, guys & girls

 

[quoting_mungo]

One function should be able to do all of that (at the same time) - and save us all a lot of aggravation and trouble.

That only helps the people who want all of those. For people who don’t want the full set, it’s not going to save any aggravation at all. That was my point. I don’t mind people wanting draconian block functions, but I don’t. Separating different measures into separate toggles gives more flexibility than saying “nuclear option or nothing.”

 

[Frank Gulotta]

Lol, not sure this would do much. They tried it on deviantart, because a few people constantly whined about furries. They did it; and guess what? there are still a few people constantly whining.

I think it's much better to develop both your search skills and your resistance to occasionally eyeing something you don't like; if a robot does everything for you, you'll end up with atrophied capacities.

 

[1234554321]

A submission tag blacklist AND an ad one would be nice. Like, you get some pretty disgusting shit from time to time like, what the fuck was it, this lion voring some thing whole. Thanks, I did not fucking need to see that. Anyway, I've been here long enough to know that we won't get either of those things. Ever

 

[Cilenomon]

Lol, not sure this would do much. They tried it on deviantart, because a few people constantly whined about furries. They did it; and guess what? there are still a few people constantly whining.

I think it's much better to develop both your search skills and your resistance to occasionally eyeing something you don't like; if a robot does everything for you, you'll end up with atrophied capacities.

Yeah, they keep bitching about it because some people only know how to do that, which I don't count these peoples.

 

[Pahawe]

A tag filtering system is direly needed on this site, I've been seeing it get worse and worse of late in the categories I usually search for. When I'm looking for art of kobolds, snakes or simply World of Warcraft I do not want to see vore, gore, peril, scat and watersports by default, yet of late there are one or two users who seemingly spam art with these themes, meaning I have solid blocks of my search results sometimes ten or more deep (if you look for kobold stuff today you'll see exactly what I mean). I think that when the site was young this wasn't so much of an issue, but as some of the members here grow older and their tastes either become more jaded or extreme and as a result more of this kind of art has proliferated, especially for certain species, though I don't know why. As for blacklisting art from certain users... Yes. Please. All I need to do is say the name 'Whitekitten' and we'll ALL know why he has a dedicated tag on sites like E621 so that folks can filter out his content.

 

[quoting_mungo]

A tag filtering system is direly needed on this site, I've been seeing it get worse and worse of late in the categories I usually search for. When I'm looking for art of kobolds, snakes or simply World of Warcraft I do not want to see vore, gore, peril, scat and watersports by default, yet of late there are one or two users who seemingly spam art with these themes, meaning I have solid blocks of my search results sometimes ten or more deep (if you look for kobold stuff today you'll see exactly what I mean). I think that when the site was young this wasn't so much of an issue, but as some of the members here grow older and their tastes either become more jaded or extreme and as a result more of this kind of art has proliferated, especially for certain species, though I don't know why. As for blacklisting art from certain users... Yes. Please. All I need to do is say the name 'Whitekitten' and we'll ALL know why he has a dedicated tag on sites like E621 so that folks can filter out his content.

You can already filter search results to exclude both specific artists and keywords. Built-in filters may make it more convenient, but it’s only for non-search browsing that filters are more or less the only viable hypothetical option.

 

[Frank Gulotta]

Yeah, they keep bitching about it because some people only know how to do that, which I don't count these peoples.

Hmm, fair enough. It does appear to be a few people's hobby to complain, but I guess many people also would merely like it if they could weed out one thing from their search results.

In other news, see that one vote that says "no"? it's me! I feel so rare!

 

[RobCivecat]

I really only would want to blacklist one term/artists that is spamming hate-art in a fandom. No, I'm not making this up, art pieces made with the only intention to upset people, there is no sexual arousal, no fetish or personal entertainment from the maker's part, just the sick joy, of knowing that you possibly feel sick from seeing it. I can't believe that people think it would be a negative thing to make this possible to close toxic people like these out.

People say "grow a ticker skin and deal with it" but that's the opposite of a healthy thing. If a certain type of image gives me negative emotions its not healthy to keep those emotions repressed, and obviously complaining isn't going to solve anything either, since these kind of hate-art makers literally get off on complainers. So what I'm suppose to do? Trying to "deal with it" works a couple of times, there is a limit to people being able to handle negative emotions when a douchebag constantly bombards them with targeted hate-art. Only thing you can do is to try to avoid getting these negative emotions in the first place. And if that's not possible on this site with a simple solution of adding a tag blacklist, only thing that can be done is not even browsing art on the site at all.

 

[quoting_mungo]

I really only would want to blacklist one term/artists that is spamming hate-art in a fandom. No, I'm not making this up, art pieces made with the only intention to upset people, there is no sexual arousal, no fetish or personal entertainment from the maker's part, just the sick joy, of knowing that you possibly feel sick from seeing it. I can't believe that people think it would be a negative thing to make this possible to close toxic people like these out.

People say "grow a ticker skin and deal with it" but that's the opposite of a healthy thing. If a certain type of image gives me negative emotions its not healthy to keep those emotions repressed, and obviously complaining isn't going to solve anything either, since these kind of hate-art makers literally get off on complainers. So what I'm suppose to do? Trying to "deal with it" works a couple of times, there is a limit to people being able to handle negative emotions when a douchebag constantly bombards them with targeted hate-art. Only thing you can do is to try to avoid getting these negative emotions in the first place. And if that's not possible on this site with a simple solution of adding a tag blacklist, only thing that can be done is not even browsing art on the site at all.

If it’s art created/posted with the express purpose of stirring up shit, that’s explicitly against site rules. If it’s targeting specific individuals, that may be harassment and can be reported by those individuals.

It’s not entirely clear whether the art you object to falls under either of those, or is just a topic that you have strong feelings about, so I don’t want to presume, but depending on exact circumstances there may be recourse.