• Fur Affinity Forums are governed by Fur Affinity's Rules and Policies. Links and additional information can be accessed in the Site Information Forum.

[@@@ ON HOLD @@@]: New Policy in Effect: Imageshack Behavior

Status
Not open for further replies.

dendora

Member
RE: New Policy in Effect: Imageshack Behavior

Is this just in the main gallery or in scraps too?
It'd be a shame to enforce it so harshly in scraps but on the whole its a pretty good idea.
 

Quaidis

Member
RE: New Policy in Effect: Imageshack Behavior

I think this was a good decision. It fills up the system fast when the browse window is plagued with 50 pictures of the same unpainted clay sculpture of a blank head or the more popular 300 pictures of a 3d croc humping a well-endowed zebra chick. I also found the constant pictures of users, their friends, the conventions they went to, their remote dental surgery the previous day, screenshots, repeated random puppy and kitten photos because their new pet is k@waI1, and the photos that people found on the net that they liked and wanted to show everyone else to be rather annoying.

Also find that people are over-reacting. Why are you over-reacting?

It's in human nature to take something someone else says and apply it to yourselves, I know. But come on. If someone is worried that their entire set of individual warhammer space marine pictures are going to be removed, why not simply cut and paste them all into one solid image or take a single photo with them all together? Or make a website out of them and link it to your journal. If you take 10 shots of your puppy playing with a ball, why not put all the different photos together into one picture? You could also post these in your scraps and you wont have your fingers surgically removed by the staff.

Common sense says that the FA staff isn't going to witchhunt. So calm down. There's a huge difference between 20 shots you randomly took on SL then posted all at once and a shot of a SL pic that took you quite a while to accompish or put together with creative tastes (you could even post that accomplished pic in 3 different poses with no threat to your personal security). There's a huge difference between a snapshot you took of your kitty playing with a toy mouse over a webcam and a photo (out of possible many) you broke your back taking of the contours in a cat's furred face as it lays in the autumn sunset. There's quite a wide difference between taking a stock ebay photo of the jellybean/plushie they just bought and a sexually suggestive picture in spiffy lights and nice background of plushies/jellybeans with a message behind it.

There's a rediculously huge difference between a submission you made/took/composed/wrote yourself and one you sacked randomly off the interweb because it looked cool.


If you still think the rules are directed at you, look at your work. Did you make/take/compose/write the submission, yourself? Did you do it with artistic reasoning or was it just 'spur of the moment'? Are you submitting one pic with the same photos/pictures put together or 10 individual submissions of those same photos individually (btw, if you log on one day to post your work and the browse page contains All of your submissions for 3 pages, you're more than likely flooding your art)? Is your gallery filled with repeated photos of yourself as... Yourself?

(concerning photos) Remember that it's not the content of the photo that is the problem in this case, it's the purpose and way in which you took it. People can disagree all they want for if the item in the photo is art. However if the person took it spur of the moment with a bad webcam and filled their entire gallery with it to the point that people browsing FA get pissed by its ever-present looming, then it's a problem. If you didn't take the photo, that might pose a problem. Should that picture be taken for the purpose of displaying an item you bought and not for the purpose of displaying art (and done repeatedly), you might get a talk to.




And the rest just rambles on from here.



Btw, dendora. Someone asked that a page or two back. I believe the answer to it was that this only applies to main submissions, not scraps.
 
RE: New Policy in Effect: Imageshack Behavior

http://www.furaffinity.net/view/183980/ THIS is flooding?!

a.) Excellent quality; has good lighting, focus, cleaned up in photoshop
b.) animal-related
c.) can be used as a reference
 

Quaidis

Member
RE: New Policy in Effect: Imageshack Behavior

did you see the entire example? The person posted the same exact photo 10 some different times. It's a nice photo, but they didn't have to post it in 10 different submissions. The picture is good, the act of posting it multiple times is flooding.
 
RE: New Policy in Effect: Imageshack Behavior

Gotcha.


Inofitself, though, it should be allowed. I don't understand why anyone would submit something, 'art' or not, multiple times. :-/
 

Quaidis

Member
RE: New Policy in Effect: Imageshack Behavior

The pic is allowed. The rule isn't against the pic, it's against the fact that the pic was repeatedly posted. The new guideline (or a piece of it anyway) is saying that you can post nice art, but you can't post it a billion times. All the staff would probably do is either tell the person to crop it down to 1 submission of that specific photo or do it themselves. They wouldn't go removing the nice pic of the bird completely off FA and say, 'never post this bird again'.

One reason people post a pic over and over again is so other people will 'notice it' more. This implies that they'll get more comments. In reality all it does it antagonize the system and flood it with unnessisary copies. Also bugs people who browse the forum considerably.
 

Salt

New Member
RE: New Policy in Effect: Imageshack Behavior

I think a lot of people are missing one other facet to their posted works.

Each item posted is accompanied (most of the time) with a description of what it is.

You can have a picture of a cat and say "Here's my cat, Mr. Cuddles" and that's going to be off-topic.

You can have a picture of a cat and trump it up with some glorified description about how this cat lived through two world wars and the great depression while still holding the title as the worlds greatest mouser, and it's probably considered art.

If some of you are so worried that what you post could be flagged, why don't you explicitly state in your description what makes it art-worthy? Dragoneer has already stated that he'll gladly make exceptions. So give him a reason to make an exception for your art. You'll sleep better at night.

Salt
 

Torakhan

Member
RE: New Policy in Effect: Imageshack Behavior

THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU!

FA isn't trying to screw anyone, they're trying to stop people who are taking advantage of the image-hosting service and don't seem to understand what the purpose of FA is (Furry artwork/craft by the artist themselves... not showing everyday nonsense to a captured audience.)

I'm so happy to see this go into effect.  It's been a pet peeve of mine that's been growing quickly over the last few months. ("here's 10 pictures of my pet fish... rather than put the 10 pictures into one file, I'm dumping each one here without even a description!" *grrrrsnarl*)

This is a artistic/craft submission site, with a common thread of "Furries".  I'll be so happy to see the decreased numbers of "off-topic" stuff now that we actually have the "Topic" in writing! :D

Thank you, 'yena and crew.

(Mmmm... Might have to get me a Pay-Account here if they become available... :) )
 

badkittyamy

Member
RE: New Policy in Effect: Imageshack Behavior

I_Own_Charles said:
http://www.furaffinity.net/view/183980/ THIS is flooding?!

a.) Excellent quality; has good lighting, focus, cleaned up in photoshop
b.) animal-related
c.) can be used as a reference

Oh bugger >_> lol that's me. I guess I'll move some of the others from the Preening Series to scraps. Looking at my gallery from a vewiers standpoint it does seem to look like a lot of the same of that guy. See people I'm affected by this rule but I don't care.

Why is when the mods try to better the site everyone complains? How hard is it to take these non-related photos to photobucket? It's free too and has tons of space. That's what I do FA is a place for constructive critisism so if you're posting just so that people can see you dog rather than critque the shot you're in the wrong place anyway. Art galleries are not pet your ego palace.

Share your art not every minute aspect of your life THAT is what Photobucket and the forums are for. You want your friends to see Ms. Kitty? Post it on photobucket and link to it in the forums. It's even EASIER that posting it to FA so what's the problem?

Question though mods, for series shots like mine are they allowed to just be sent to scraps or should I take them down completely?
 

Ziba the lioness

Overgrown housecat
RE: New Policy in Effect: Imageshack Behavior

Woha! Been aaages since I was here last, but anyway, back to topic :)

I think this would be a very good idea. I can name a few friends (but wont) that uses FA as a photobucket account for atleast 50% of all their uploads and to tell the truth, it bugs the .... .... ....... out of me >.< It seriously does! But I have yet to have the guts to tell them that FA is not a photobucket, I dont want to make enemies with anyone Ive befriended there.

A rule that states that photobucket related uploads is not allowed would help greatly on this problem

and as far as Rouge2 wrote

I hope there won't be a size limit to how much you can upload.

Somehow I too hope that a limit on image size will never get through, but on the other hand some people uploads art that stretches the size for miles and its a pain in the ... to look at, if you want to see the other half of the pic that is... If it could be made so you can choose wether you want a limited size on the images you view or not or if to follow the DA example, make it possible for people to "download" the image to see the full size.
Just some suggestions for the extreme sized images, lets say 2000x2000 (yes I have seen drawings uploaded on FA that big.....)
 

Torakhan

Member
RE: New Policy in Effect: Imageshack Behavior

Kels said:
So animal-related art photography is not considered "art"?

It's more a question of "is it an artistic, well constructed artisticly created photograph, or just a picture?" If you've put thought into composition, cropped, chosen the best ONE of the several you took, corrected it and it looks like there's been time and effort in it, then it should be obvious that it's allowed. (Also, you'll get a few "off-topic" pics allowed anyways) and old photos will be grandfathered in (unless your current directory is excessively filled with random pics of your cat).
 

Wolfblade

Member
RE: New Policy in Effect: Imageshack Behavior

STRAKER said:
the hell??? ok, so, if it's an "image in which the photographer (me) clearly and without doubt considered frame, light, exposure and subject of the image" but it happens to be a picture of a stuffed animal, i can post it without restrictions, and seeing as how it's a stuffed animal pic and as there are plenty of furries that are into "plushie" then it's not off topic. but, if the admin doesesn't like my art or ME personally, they could say "so what if you held a flashlight and pointed it at your stuffies, that's not lighing and artistic merit." and it's removed...

Okay, I'm not meaning this to be insulting or anything, but I'm curious as to whether or not English is your first language. Let me try to explain again.

The staff is not going to remove your pictures just because they do not like you.

A: What reason do they have to not like you?

B: Have you seen them remove submissions just because they don't like someone?

C: There are people on the site that have given good reason to not be liked by staff, and yet they are still here, so there is no logic supporting any claim that the staff ejects people based on personal feelings.

I feel that you may be misinterpreting the rule, and twice now you seem to have taken the opposite of the intent of what you have read. That's why I ask if maybe English isn't your native language.

STRAKER said:
by the way wolfblade, a "photo where, for example, a person has watched a landscape, chosen a specific vantage point to shoot from, waited for a certain weather/lighting situation, and framed the shot with thoughts of composition and such, is very different from a very well-made photo of Mittens the Cat" huh, well, the photographer didn't make the landscape either, so i don't call it art because they didn't make it themselves. subjective rules DO NOT WORK. someone ALWAYS has a different idea as to what is and is not art!

Exactly. Art is subjective. You can not ever write a clear and concise rule that will be universally accepted as defining "Art."

So the staff is going to use THEIR idea of what is Art on THEIR site. I think everyone will be perfectly alright if people could just chill and wait to see that the staff DOES NOT suddenly start deleting all these images that people have put time and effort into. Just sit tight, relax, and IF you receive a note from the staff regarding your submissions, THEN explain to them calmly why your works constitute "Art."

STRAKER said:
I wonder if you remember the problems caused at y! with the "anthro rule", what constitutes anthro and what doesn't and how they allow basically "humans with animal ears and tails" but THATS not "anthro" somehow.

FA is not Y!G. It never will be. Even if they copy-pasted Y!G's entire site code over to FA. You know why? Because FA staff is not Y!G staff. They are not running the site to cater it specifically to their own personal tastes as Y!G is.

If they were, there would be a whole lot more than just random kitten photos being removed.

Y!G was a mess for very specific reasons. Those reasons will never apply to FA.

STRAKER said:
oh, and i never said I "worry about the staff suddenly sprouting horns and dismissing people at random." and i know "They don't kick out people just for not likeing them, in fact they have specifically allowed many people they're not fond of to stick around" i said "joe schmoes like me that can't draw, will have to withdraw our abilities to interact with artists and just be a "watcher" and therefore ignorable and not a real part to this community that we are here for in the first place." as in, i will loose all the people who watch me BECAUSE of my "plushie porn" pictures. also, as to the "this staff has proven to be EXTREMELY lenient in the enforcement of their rules." yeahhhh, except that Dragoneer himself has stated that it "will be enforced lightly at first, more strict over time." so please, don't try to make it seem that this rule may not even mean anything to us.

The rule will mean something. But not nearly the horrendous doom that some people are acting like it means. He said it will be lightly enforced at first, and more strict over time. That does not mean that eventually they will be banning all photography.

Even IF they were to completely ban your photos, which isn't likely to happen, you still would not lose your ability to interact with people. There are countless people who are happy and talkative members of this community without submitting a single image. People who are friendly, appreciative, and who comment and critique on artists they like and other users who respond to their comments.

Here, for example: http://www.furaffinity.net/user/brokenwing/

Not a single submission. He doesn't even post the art of his own character that is done for him (of which he gets plenty, not because he sucks up, but because people like him). Yet he has 102 watches. I'd say he manages to be a part of this community without being a contributor, just because he's an awesomely friendly guy.

Ultimately dude, just relax. If you never get a note about your submissions, then don't worry about it. IF you ever do, THEN you can talk with the Admin who notes you about whether or not your pictures count or not. Dragoneer has made it very clear that there will be consideration made for images that may or may not fall under this rule.
 

Wolfblade

Member
RE: New Policy in Effect: Imageshack Behavior

Dragoon_of_Light said:
I hope this doesn't include stories, or poems, or music.

It doesn't. Please, go read the link provided to the wiki. Don't hope and fret over whether this rule affects you, go read for yourself and that way you know what the rule is. K? ^_^

I_Own_Charles said:
All this from a stock/reference photo of a deer fetus. Oh and someone's "hairy Mexican ass".

Those specific cases had no more to do with this than any and all of the other equally off-topic photos. At all. They're simply particularly visible examples of a much more general problem.

This change in policy has been discussed for months if not longer. People, both staff AND users, have been complaining about the amount of extremely off-topic and just-for-the-hell-of-it photos for a long time. And not just the small vocal minority that were whining about cub art, but an actual signifiant number of people.

This is not so much a new rule as it is merely putting down in writing what they had tried to have as a general guideline for a long time, but were unable to enforce because it wasn't written anywhere.

Endless Night said:
Also you could always make a personal webpage and link it in your artist comments to share any photos that were removed. If people care about you enough or are curious about you enough to want to see your webcam shots, TLK plushie collection, pet rabbit, potato chip that loooks like a dog penis, etc. they'll be willing to click an extra link to see those pics.

Exactly. Nobody is trying to excise the "community" part of this community, but this site IS here for a fairly specific purpose despite the rather large amount of leeway they give people to deviate from that purpose.

With user traffic and hardware resource usage beginning to become a concern, stemming a little bit of off-topic use now can make a big difference for getting the most out of this upgrade in the long run.

LaserBeams said:
Overall I'm happy with this, but I'm a little fuzzy on the wording of some of the official rules:

"Not of artistic merit" includes submission that serve artistic purpose and were created "on the fly" or "just for fun" and were not in attempt to make a frameworthy or portfolio quality imagery. Examples of such images include: screenshots, blog photos, image macros, etc.

That essentially rules out sketches and unfinished work - unless that counts as portfolio quality (usually it's not frameworthy)? I just think that could be a little more clear.

That line refers to photography only, as do all the "imageshack behavior" rules. Drawings are not intended to be covered by this.

Salt said:
If some of you are so worried that what you post could be flagged, why don't you explicitly state in your description what makes it art-worthy? Dragoneer has already stated that he'll gladly make exceptions. So give him a reason to make an exception for your art. You'll sleep better at night.

Please, yes. If you genuinely feel your photo to be Art, do this. I am sure everyone will be pleased at how much of a difference this would make.

Torakhan said:
Kels said:
So animal-related art photography is not considered "art"?

It's more a question of "is it an artistic, well constructed artisticly created photograph, or just a picture?" If you've put thought into composition, cropped, chosen the best ONE of the several you took, corrected it and it looks like there's been time and effort in it, then it should be obvious that it's allowed. (Also, you'll get a few "off-topic" pics allowed anyways) and old photos will be grandfathered in (unless your current directory is excessively filled with random pics of your cat).

Correct, except that he said old images will not be grandfathered in. That doesn't mean they will suddenly start deleting things at random though, it just means that sooner or later, some people MAY find themselves being asked to trim back some of the excess of their gallery.

badkittyamy said:
I_Own_Charles said:
http://www.furaffinity.net/view/183980/ THIS is flooding?!

a.) Excellent quality; has good lighting, focus, cleaned up in photoshop
b.) animal-related
c.) can be used as a reference

Oh bugger >_> lol that's me. I guess I'll move some of the others from the Preening Series to scraps. Looking at my gallery from a vewiers standpoint it does seem to look like a lot of the same of that guy. See people I'm affected by this rule but I don't care.

Why is when the mods try to better the site everyone complains? How hard is it to take these non-related photos to photobucket? It's free too and has tons of space. That's what I do FA is a place for constructive critisism so if you're posting just so that people can see you dog rather than critque the shot you're in the wrong place anyway. Art galleries are not pet your ego palace.

Share your art not every minute aspect of your life THAT is what Photobucket and the forums are for. You want your friends to see Ms. Kitty? Post it on photobucket and link to it in the forums. It's even EASIER that posting it to FA so what's the problem?

Question though mods, for series shots like mine are they allowed to just be sent to scraps or should I take them down completely?

You, sir, are Awesome, and an excellent example of the proper way for a user to respond to this announcement. I hope everyone who is concerned about this takes their cue from you here. *applause* ^_^

Again, everyone with questions and concerns, PLEASE go actually READ the wiki, AND this thread. Most questions and clarifications people are likely to ask for have already been posted here. There's no sense in not reading a 6 page thread and repeating questions already answered, so it then becomes a 15 page thread and even fewer people read what has already been said. X_x
 

Zelinko

New Member
RE: New Policy in Effect: Imageshack Behavior

[size=xx-large]ANOTHER BAD IDEA[/size]

You're screwing over the Authors now.

ALSO WTF WITH ALL THE 500 INTERNAL SERVER ERRORS AND 505 BAD GATEWAYS NOW!
 

Xan_vega

Member
RE: New Policy in Effect: Imageshack Behavior

I have read the wiki, I have read the forum but I keep seeing the same question being asked and not get answered (if I missed it, sorry) does this ONLY pertain to the gallery or is scraps included? scraps is where I put my non-artistic items, as that was what I was told it was for. If you limit on the scraps, then what's the point for that folder?
 

Zelinko

New Member
RE: New Policy in Effect: Imageshack Behavior

Xan_vega said:
I have read the wiki, I have read the forum but I keep seeing the same question being asked and not get answered (if I missed it, sorry) does this ONLY pertain to the gallery or is scraps included? scraps is where I put my non-artistic items, as that was what I was told it was for. If you limit on the scraps, then what's the point for that folder?

Also No one has touched the issue of stories, music, flashes [both wip and completed].

The Wiki is so vague I'm seeing everyone going Crazy. I'd personally say stupid change and most of the spamming is because the Upload system has been fucked up for a while. People unsure the image is even uploading and with all the error messages people might be having a hard time deleting them.

Apparently Dragoneer's thinking he can make up for royal server fuckups after the entire drama storm almost 2 months ago.
 

Arshes Nei

Masticates in Public
RE: New Policy in Effect: Imageshack Behavior

Is there a legitimate reason for so much "quote wang" I mean geeze. I understand people wanting to discuss the issue, but really.
 

Foxstar

lol reggin
RE: New Policy in Effect: Imageshack Behavior

Zelinko said:
[size=xx-large]ANOTHER BAD IDEA[/size]

You're screwing over the Authors now.

ALSO WTF WITH ALL THE 500 INTERNAL SERVER ERRORS AND 505 BAD GATEWAYS NOW!

As Yiffstarr is around, I don't really see a issue here.
 

Foxstar

lol reggin
RE: New Policy in Effect: Imageshack Behavior

Arshes Nei said:
Is there a legitimate reason for so much "quote wang" I mean geeze. I understand people wanting to discuss the issue, but really.

Because furries take any cutting back on their 'freedoms' rather poorly even though this rule will really only effect people who used FA like Photobucket.
People need to understand this is so the new server doesn't end up wanged to hell in six months to a year and while yes, they may have helped pay for it, there is no divine right of donation that gives the right to flood, post ten pictures of their room, cat, seven copies of the same story or 20 pictures of their Gundams.

It's logical, if people want to upload whatever, whenever, then FA is going to end up a pay site and you haven't even come close to seeing drama as you will when that happens.
 

Wolfblade

Member
RE: New Policy in Effect: Imageshack Behavior

Xan_vega said:
I have read the wiki, I have read the forum but I keep seeing the same question being asked and not get answered (if I missed it, sorry) does this ONLY pertain to the gallery or is scraps included? scraps is where I put my non-artistic items, as that was what I was told it was for. If you limit on the scraps, then what's the point for that folder?

Scraps, as I understood it, was mainly created for art works that the user may have felt were "unfinished" or "rough" works. It has been used by many as a dumping ground for off-topic images, and I think most people felt this to be okay for a while, but there has been just too much image-dump behavior, and so this new guideline is here.

As I have understood its intent from staffmembers(though perhaps some clarification would be useful), the imageshack behavior policy applies to both scraps and the main gallery.

Zelinko said:
[size=xx-large]ANOTHER BAD IDEA[/size]

You're screwing over the Authors now.

ALSO WTF WITH ALL THE 500 INTERNAL SERVER ERRORS AND 505 BAD GATEWAYS NOW!

Zelinko said:
Also No one has touched the issue of stories, music, flashes [both wip and completed].

Because they are not an issue. This announcement specifically addresses photography, and for the moment, that is all that is being addressed.

Zelinko said:
The Wiki is so vague I'm seeing everyone going Crazy. I'd personally say stupid change and most of the spamming is because the Upload system has been fucked up for a while. People unsure the image is even uploading and with all the error messages people might be having a hard time deleting them.

The purpose of having a wiki is to have documentation that is easily updated and adapted as the need for such becomes apparent. Maybe it would help things if people going crazy would... not go crazy. Just for a moment at least. Everyone stay calm, ask questions if they have not been addressed already (like Xan_vega), and otherwise just stop with the prophecies of doom.

Zelinko said:
Apparently Dragoneer's thinking he can make up for royal server fuckups after the entire drama storm almost 2 months ago.

Nice to know we have some clairvoyants in the userbase. However, if I may suggest an alternative way of looking at this; it is possible that the staff, not just Dragoneer, has decided as an Administration, to enact a more firm policy on an issue that has been a source of irritation to many for a long time. The issue may have been handled at this particular time BECAUSE of all the server and traffic issues, and this is one way of lessening hardware and resource strain by removing usage that really was never what this site was intended for.
 

Wolfblade

Member
RE: New Policy in Effect: Imageshack Behavior

Zelinko said:
WHAT ABOUT THE GOD DAMN ERROR MESSAGES!

Not relevant to this thread. By all means, start a new topic in the appropriate forum if you feel the need to do so.

Also, you might not have noticed, but your caps lock appears to be on. Just FYI.
 

Foxstar

lol reggin
RE: New Policy in Effect: Imageshack Behavior

Zelinko said:
WHAT ABOUT THE GOD DAMN ERROR MESSAGES!

Cry more about the site your not paying to use. I'm sure Dragoneer/Preyfar could pull the logs and let you see how many people use the site every single day and as like it's been said, the current server can't handle teh load.
 

Quaidis

Member
RE: New Policy in Effect: Imageshack Behavior

On page 5, post 85, Dragoneer says that scraps were ok to post items in and this only applied to the main gallery. However the flooding rule still applied for everywhere. I don't want to start a fight, but he did answer the 'scraps included?' question.

Zelinko, please calm down. How long have we had these error messages? As far as I know, those I converse with and I have only had them for, at most, no more than 48 hours. Compaired to the entirety in time that FA's existed, that's drastically abrupt. I'm sure they're simple bumps in a road that will be paved over and not the doom of all FA.
 

Kels

New Member
RE: New Policy in Effect: Imageshack Behavior

Wolfblade said:
Maybe it would help things if people going crazy would... not go crazy. Just for a moment at least. Everyone stay calm, ask questions if they have not been addressed already (like Xan_vega), and otherwise just stop with the prophecies of doom.

That is precisely what I was doing with my question, although it occasioned a bit of condescention from you about photography vs. drawing. All I wanted to know was are artistic photographs of pets lumped in with all other photographs of pets, which had not by then been addressed. Dragoneer's answer seemed to imply that yes, they were all considered "not-art", which made me do a double-take.

No panic, no prophecies, no nothing. A simple question and a bit of a surprised response. Although immediately after I seemed to be lumped in with the panickers, even though I believe if dealt with evenly, it can be a good policy.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top