The future of NSFW

Posted in

#76 by warfoki
2020-02-22 at 07:41
< report >I see several issues with this approach.

I'm guessing the algorithm for selecting the images to flag will prioritize the ones with no flags other than the uploaders (I'm assuming the uploader can still set the safety of the images they upload). In which case the first 1-2 votes will probably stick for a long time, since after that images will be of low priority. So if someone flags something wrong, it can take a long time for it to get corrected through this system, as I don't think we'll have too many people going through this feature on hours end to flag things. I'm here enough to see that the latest edits section on the home page majorly features the same few people editing, with some occasional newbies editing stuff they are reading at the moment. I don't think too many people would sit down to do this, especially considering that you would have to be okay with any and all extreme fetishes showed right into your face in their fully explicit glory, since the selection would be random. So, while I can edit pages even from the library or from a tablet during a lecture, since I'm in control how explicit the content is I'm editing, I couldn't do that with this feature. Also, I can easily imagine people getting permanently turned away from doing this random flagging, the moment the algorithm throws something like gore, vore, scat, bestiality and so on in their way. Plus we really don't have anything to actually encourage people to do this, other than them wanting to look through random images on hours end. Most sites relying on such a system either have a lot more robust active userbase than VNDB or give out some form of reward for tagging and flagging to incentivise people. Or both.

Also, if it is entirely a voting system and not part of the edit history, then how exactly uploading images will work? I've assumed earlier that the uploader can set the initial flags, but in that case how is that not part of the edit history? Will the images be first uploaded to the server but not actually shown until they get through the random flagging system to gain a minimum amount of flags? That would cause a heck of a latency. If it shown immediately on the page basing the flags on the uploader's flagging, then how can we directly correct it if it's not part of the edit history. Like, let's say that I uploaded this image (very NSFW): link Let's suppose that I accidentally left it as SFW. As is, I will immediately notice that, can go back the edit page and fix it. I can also edit obviously NSFW stuff that others have uploaded. If it's not part of the edit history how do I do this? Go to the random flagging page and hope it'll show up randomly? And if I can vote on flags right on the page of the VN, not just on randomly selected ones, then Zakashi's voting manipulation question is suddenly very much worth considering. And if somebody does vandalize the flagging on a page like that, chances are we will be slow to notice. The main reason while malicious edits tend to get noticed fast is because they show up in our notifications. But if the flag voting isn't part of the edit log, then that presumably won't be the case.Last modified on 2020-02-22 at 15:49
#77 by ffthewinner
2020-02-22 at 08:11
< report >"Or should we just continue doing what we've been doing"
this. the system works well enough, and changing it will be far more headache than it is worth imo.
#78 by eacil
2020-02-22 at 08:36
< report >Don't worry, Warfoki, gamification is the key word. Yorhel will spend the next six months programming VndbPop, a unique sim experience for PC, Mac and Linux. It's a gameplay first approach that's part clicker, part puzzle game, part spoiler party, with procedural levels featuring more than 135000 CG (!), a visual novel style of presentation, an abrasive western writing style and plenty of "plot". (Banned from steam for asset flipping, god knows why?)

Wikidata is using this but as a way to fill the holes in an entertaining way. It's purely alternative, not the primary system. It just piles up contributions and you can always fix them. It can't totally be randomized with no control on it. At worst, make the selection randomized but then pin the votes to a tab like the tags tab, which means the uploader will always have the first vote unlocked on this tab.
One million votes for a minor feature I am not sure many people even care about, and that will spoil the life out of your body, it's very optimistic.
#79 by yorhel
2020-02-22 at 08:50
< report >I came up with the idea while writing t13541.5, so I had some time to think it through.

I'm guessing the algorithm for selecting the images to flag will prioritize the ones with no flags other than the uploaders
It will heavily prioritize any image with less than 10 votes (to be tuned) or with a high standard deviation (implying it's a tough one to flag).

The uploader of an image will indeed get the initial vote. People can always adjust their own votes later on. It will not be part of the edit history. It's a bit of an open question what to do with images with a low confidence (i.e. low number of votes or high stddev), but the answer to that may depend on how popular the voting thing will be. If many people vote, I'm sure we can reduce the latency quite a bit while remaining high confidence, otherwise we may have to accept risky images or be overly cautious.

I'm more optimistic about this attracting contributors, it's *much* easier to flag images than to edit anything in the database, since all you need is to be familiar with the guidelines, which can be displayed prominently along with the options to choose from. It's perfect for some braindead but productive off-time, very much unlike everything else in the DB. I can see myself voting a lot and I'm not exactly an active DB contributor. I am banking on the assumption that there are many people who would love to help out with improving the database but have trouble with the high barrier to entry that we currently have. Also, looking at random anime images is fun, it's why imageboards are a thing.

There's a few unknowns and risks, but it beats the alternatives IMO.Last modified on 2020-02-22 at 08:59
#80 by rampaa
2020-02-22 at 15:16
< report >I still think this is too much hassle for too little (potential) gain. Much more so if a whole new voting system is needed just for this. We need a better guideline either way and when a better guideline has been built, it can easily advice people to err on the side of caution when in doubt. If two people disagree whether something is safe or not and if there's enough room for their dispute in the guideline, erring on it being not safe should be adequate enough.

On a somewhat related note, "Safe-Questionable-Explicit" system should not -and generally does not (link, link )- cover guro. So if we are going to depart from the binary system, I think a separate flag for guro should be introduced.Last modified on 2020-02-22 at 15:18
#81 by yorhel
2020-02-22 at 15:44
< report >
should not -and generally does not- cover guro
Why not though?
#82 by rampaa
2020-02-22 at 15:50
< report >
Why not though?

I meant gore, not guro, sorry.

As for why I think gore needs a different flag, it's because sexual suggestiveness and gore are entirely different concepts.

Personally I am fine with "explicit" and "suggestive" content but seeing gore images out-of-sudden is not very pleasant. I was fine with it being NSFW when we had a binary system, but if we are going to fine tune the system we might as well make this distinction as well, with the cost of little to no effort.Last modified on 2020-02-22 at 15:52
#83 by naiohoras
2020-02-22 at 18:42
< report >I'm somewhat a little opposed to the voting system. not a bad idea at all, but just like already explained by people here, it sounds too much hassle for a little gain.

how about we fix the guidelines and implement the three flagging sytem *first*, then if people are still arguing shits, you can easily consider implementing the voting system again.

as for Rampaa's gore flag suggestion, I don't think it's necessary. I've seen such images on imageboards and it blends on the NSFW flag just fine. adding too many flags will confuse the sailors anyway. though in the end, Yorhel's the one to take the wheel.
#84 by alto
2020-02-22 at 19:29
< report >The ideas in #72 and #79 feel solid to me. I sometimes spend a few minutes hitting the random vn link for fun so I can totally see rating random images too. Assuming mods can still override egregiously wrong votes, I can't see any downsides compared to the existing system (other than the work to implement it!). Should there not be enough participation you could always gamify it more. Say, adding "Rated X images" stats display option to profiles or icons like the supporter ones (i.e. rate 5000 images to get a badge) would be like catnip to many.
#85 by skorpiondeath
2020-02-22 at 19:43
< report >
as for Rampaa's gore flag suggestion, I don't think it's necessary
Why not? Since violence is somewhat on another level from sexual content and since you are proposing to choose between 3 flag, having a 4th one is not that bad either. At that point a user could decide if he wants to exclude gore and not sexual content from his profile page, or viceversa.

adding too many flags will confuse the sailors anyway
So being in favor of adding every shitload of traits (we have hundreds rightnow) is not confusing while having to decide between gore or sexual content will confuse people?

I still think this is too much hassle for too little (potential) gain.
That depends, first the hassle is all on yorhel side and not the users because who doesn't want to partecipate on the voting system will just be fine like today.
Second the "little" gain will be having a more democratic way of rating an image, which in most cases will stop a possible edit war. You got to express your vote and you are done. Also moderators could intervene to lock an image voting like they do today for editing wars in case some image gets a vote misuse (like for example having multiple accounts, etc..)Last modified on 2020-02-22 at 19:44
#86 by naiohoras
2020-02-22 at 21:21
< report >#85 I'm not really against the idea, actually. I just think it's not really efficient to have it when you can just jam it in to NSFW, and I have a premonition that some people will have a hard time to differentiate between gore or not ("it's just some blood, mate! or is it?" *Vsauce music plays*), as some people here certainly said "I'm afraid adding more flag will just confuse more people/have a hard making a borderline". although, I certainly can see the benefits from it as well, so... whatever the best.

first the hassle is all on yorhel side
this, is why I said the last sentence on #83. I'm afraid that it will take too long of time to implement it when the desired result *probably* could've been achieved with just implementing the three flagging system. it's up to him though.Last modified on 2020-02-22 at 21:51
#87 by beliar
2020-02-22 at 21:33
< report >As we are talking about gore, I want to pick your brains, guys. Whether we create a fourth level of NSFW for gore, or simply put it into the existing tier, we have first to decide what gore even is.

it's just some blood, mate! or is it?
Case in point: Saleté, or more precisely the 3rd and the 4th screenshots. The uploader marked them both NSFW, but I'm not sure I agree. The 3rd screen is just a little blood. There is nothing nearly enough to call it gore and label it NSFW. The 4th screen doesn't even have blood - it's only a girl making a distressed face. Sure, we can infer what is happening, but is that enough to make it NSFW? Not really, in my opinion.
#88 by naiohoras
2020-02-22 at 21:48
< report >at least can we agree that torture itself is at least to be put in "questionable"? as for the current system, I'm all in for it to be in NSFW, since it's disturbing af. I even dare myself to say that torture should categorized as " gore".Last modified on 2020-02-22 at 21:48
#89 by beliar
2020-02-22 at 22:05
< report >
at least can we agree that torture itself is at least to be put in "questionable"?
I agree that with a three-point system these should go into the "suggestive" category.

And pictures like these show to me that we shouldn't have a separate category for gore, as in that case we should also have levels of strength for gore. The pictures I pointed out are not "strong" enough to be flat-out called "gore". Hence, if we used a special category for gore, I would reluctant to put them there. On the other hand, with a three-point system, I would be confident to put them in the middle as "suggestive" and call it a day.
#90 by warfoki
2020-02-22 at 22:40
< report >With the current binary system: outright torture of any kind = NSFW, gore or no gore, at least that's how I've always seen it.

Also, if we want a separate flag for gore, here's a question: how do we flag guro then? Gore or sexual content?
#91 by rampaa
2020-02-22 at 22:46
< report >
I've seen such images on imageboards and it blends on the NSFW flag just fine
Neither Gelbooru nor Danbooru considers gore itself as explicit. You can have "safe" images that have gore in them. Do you mind sharing which image boards you use? Maybe their guidelines can help us to create a good guideline.

I just think it's not really efficient to have it when you can just jam it in to NSFW
Jamming *everything* remotely questionable into NSFW is even more easier. But I thought the idea was to give people a finer control over what kind of images they see and not see. How jamming gore into NSFW will help that?

Whether we create a fourth level of NSFW for gore, or simply put it into the existing tier
I was actually thinking a separate flag all together. Because you can have images that have no nudity or sexual suggestiveness. I believe the following would work:

Rating: Safe|Questionable|Explicit (Make "Questionable" the default selection)
Gore: Check|Uncheck

The 3rd screen is just a little blood. There is nothing nearly enough to call it gore and label it NSFW.
Her shoulder is impaled with a piece of metal. I think that makes it qualify as gore pretty easily.

The 4th screen doesn't even have blood
It does have blood though?

With the current binary system: outright torture of any kind = NSFW
If you have a good definition for outright torture, I think an "outright torture" flag would also work instead of gore.

how do we flag guro then
Rating: Explicit
Gore|Outright Torture: CheckLast modified on 2020-02-22 at 22:49
#92 by beliar
2020-02-22 at 22:48
< report >
how do we flag guro then? Gore or sexual content?
Which even further reinforces my point that it's better to stick to a three tier structure. At this point I'm only seeing drawbacks to a gore flag and no particular positives.

Edit:
Her shoulder is impaled with a piece of metal. I think that makes it qualify as gore pretty easily.
I disagree. It's torture, but definitely not gore. A little blood does not gore make. As i mention before, we would have to redefine what gore is, if we intend to humour your suggestions. Which I'm still against.Last modified on 2020-02-22 at 22:52
#93 by warfoki
2020-02-22 at 22:56
< report >
Rating: Safe|Questionable|Explicit (Make "Questionable" the default selection)
Gore: Check|Uncheck

I actually like this version, works for me.

If you have a good definition for outright torture, I think an "outright torture" flag would also work instead of gore.

Well... how about this (note that I'm tired as shit, so could be worded better):

"Images that feature clearly visible actions or events causing immense pain and/or permanent bodily harm to a character."

This way the presence of blood is not necessary, but the "immense pain" part should be enough to prevent a comedic face slap or some light spanking being flagged.Last modified on 2020-02-22 at 22:57
#94 by naiohoras
2020-02-23 at 01:58
< report >
Images that feature clearly visible actions or events causing immense pain and/or permanent bodily harm to a character.
This way the presence of blood is not necessary, but the "immense pain" part should be enough to prevent a comedic face slap or some light spanking being flagged.
which means any fight scene WITH any visible body damage such as link link link link are counted as gore? I know what you're tying to say, but it's still really vague thus further the point of not making the flag. image like these just need to be flagged as "suggestive/questionable" and ...done.

But I thought the idea was to give people a finer control over what kind of images they see and not see.
wait, wasn't the true purpose of this thread to make edit wars happen lesser and get unblocked from public network?Last modified on 2020-02-23 at 02:18
#95 by yorhel
2020-02-23 at 09:00
< report >Let me just bring the gore discussion to its logical conclusion and suggest a three-point system for that as well.

Sexual rating: Safe|Suggestive|Explicit
Violence: Safe|Minor violence or blood|Seriously gory stuff

Still not entirely sure this detail is necessary, but I can see the use case.

As for voting vs. making it part of the edit history: Yeah, that's mainly a trade-off in code complexity (i.e. how much time am I spending on this) vs. how much energy do we ("we" mostly being mods) want to spend on disputes. The actual voting stuff is pretty easy to implement, but it's the moderation tools that will take most of the time (letting mods vote on any image rather than just random, being able to list and discover bad voters, vote overruling(?), giving more weight to "trusted flaggers"(?), a report-this-image feature in case we're not taking the overly-cautious route, etc).
#96 by ginseigou
2020-02-23 at 09:21
< report >What about adding a flag for lolicon, bestiality, scat and etc?Last modified on 2020-02-23 at 09:23
#97 by beliar
2020-02-23 at 09:54
< report >
What about adding a flag for lolicon, bestiality, scat and etc?
And why no flags for slice-of-life, shopping, eating, drinking, dancing and other such perverted activities I'm sure many people have no desire to see?

I'm not sure if you are trying to be funny or are serious, but the line has to be drawn somewhere. And there comes a point where the flagging will become so convoluted that no one will bother doing it.
And I'm still for a simple thee-point system with most violence, that is not outright guro, being put under a "suggestive" flag. Otherwise, like Naiohoras have said, any fight scene could be flagged as gore. And giving a three-point system to gore already borders on the ridiculous.
#98 by sakurakoi
2020-02-23 at 10:07
< report >Just go with Safe/YMMV/Not Safe, there is no need to go out of your way for snowflakes who only want their way.

Ya like sexual content but are faint of heart? Search sure lets you exclude gore and related stuff while it is not like you have to scroll down and expand the images of a work known to have violence.

Yes, violence should be included in the guidelines to move torture and blood away from "safe" but that should be about it instead of doubling the work.
#99 by naiohoras
2020-02-23 at 11:04
< report >
As for voting vs. making it part of the edit history: Yeah, that's mainly a trade-off in code complexity (i.e. how much time am I spending on this) vs. how much energy do we ("we" mostly being mods) want to spend on disputes. The actual voting stuff is pretty easy to implement, but it's the moderation tools that will take most of the time [...]
woah it's amazing, no joke. that's gonna settle things for sure.
still, I think we need to implement the three-flagging system and fix the guidelines first before going to that, 'cause those are easier and faster to implement, right? after that, we can see about how effective the three-flagging system is and decide what to do afterward, including the voting system. I'm all down to it if shits aren't settled down after that.

also, about the gore stuff...
......
........
yep, not gonna change my mind. I'm still on the same page as Berial, but...
Safe|Minor violence or blood|Seriously gory stuff
if you decided to go with this, then sure...Last modified on 2020-02-23 at 11:19
#100 by ginseigou
2020-02-23 at 11:09
< report >@97 I think it's only logical to add a flag for a hardcore content that's forbidden in most countries.