MD5 mismatch of http://pbs.twimg.com/media/FS8kk18WUAAVutU.jpg:orig

the original had a huge watermark in the middle so I removed it, you'll see the watermark on the original piece in the source.

winkywonker said:

the original had a huge watermark in the middle so I removed it, you'll see the watermark on the original piece in the source.

Don't do that. Either upload it as is or don't upload it at all.

blindVigil said:

it's literally the same just without a watermark and reduced res, the flagging wasn't necessary.

winkywonker said:

it's literally the same just without a watermark and reduced res, the flagging wasn't necessary.

It is not literally the same, and anyone with eyes could tell. There's very obvious evidence of your tampering. How did you even manage to damage the hair? Why is the bottom right watermark half erased?

Most third-party edits are against the rules, and if removing an artist's watermarks, and poorly at that, isn't, then this site really has gone to hell. The last thing we need is people thinking we encourage our uploaders to remove their watermarks.

blindVigil said:

you say a few strands of hair are gone, give evidence or admit that it's a weak excuse for flagging.

as for the removal of the watermark, I used a site that removes watermarks, I had no control, the mechanisms of the site do everything.

and according to your logic, this site is already in the deepest depths of hell seeing as I've just checked the third-party edit tag and found that 47 out of the 107 pages are approved posts, posts of which are far worse than a simple watermark removal along with apparently a few strands of hair that only you can see are missing.

winkywonker said:

you say a few strands of hair are gone, give evidence or admit that it's a weak excuse for flagging.

as for the removal of the watermark, I used a site that removes watermarks, I had no control, the mechanisms of the site do everything.

and according to your logic, this site is already in the deepest depths of hell seeing as I've just checked the third-party edit tag and found that 47 out of the 107 pages are approved posts, posts of which are far worse than a simple watermark removal along with apparently a few strands of hair that only you can see are missing.

https://puu.sh/JDy4V/8ae3130845.jpg
Is that good enough for you?

Your cavalier attitude towards willfully damaging an artist's work is deeply concerning. Danbooru doesn't need your contributions if things like this are going to be a consistent problem with you.

And if you actually bothered to read the upload rules, some kinds of third-party edit are allowed, that's why I said most are against the rules, not all. Removing an artist's watermark isn't one of them.

blindVigil said:

not enough of a change to warrant a flag.

and your blatant manipulation by baiting mods & admins to support your flag through your own overdramatized ideas on what you think I'm trying to do only proves that you're poor at your job.

there is literally a link to the artist's original post of their own artwork that I posted within the source on this very page, so further painting me as someone who wishes to besmirch or damage any artist's works only further proves your own incompetence as a member of staff on this site

I only wished to post the full piece without the watermark in the way so that the art can be fully enjoyed, but seeing as you're throwing such a fit over it, I've posted the original as well.

winkywonker said:

not enough of a change to warrant a flag.

and your blatant manipulation by baiting mods & admins to support your flag through your own overdramatized ideas on what you think I'm trying to do only proves that you're poor at your job.

there is literally a link to the artist's original post of their own artwork that I posted within the source on this very page, so further painting me as someone who wishes to besmirch or damage any artist's works only further proves your own incompetence as a member of staff on this site

I only wished to post the full piece without the watermark in the way so that the art can be fully enjoyed, but seeing as you're throwing such a fit over it, I've posted the original as well.

The mods wouldn't have deleted it if they disagreed with me. I have literally no power. It is crazy how many people accuse me of abusing power I don't have just because I don't just look the other way when they break rules.

All you've proven here is that you shouldn't be uploading here, because you don't understand what is acceptable behavior or what this site hopes to achieve. What happens, pray tell, if the artist deletes the original post? Oh, that's right, there's no longer "literally a link to the artist's original post of their own artwork that I posted within the source on this very page". That is the entire damn point of this site. Archiving art, in its original, unmodified form, unless otherwise impossible to do so, so that it can be enjoyed by others even if it stops being available at the original source.

ANY sort of damage to the original image would be grounds for flagging. If you think otherwise, stop uploading.

blindVigil said:

I never said you abused any power because you have none, you're a builder, which means your only job is to flag bad posts and inform why if confronted about it by the uploader

what I said is you're a manipulative hack who jumps to conclusions way too quickly and is way too trigger-happy to tag anyone as a vandal or any other such wild accusations based on a perspective of any given situation like this one of which you then opt to instantly judge by face value instead of actually doing your job and investigating before coming to a definitive conclusion to what's really going on, my point is you're way too emotional to be a builder

I've talked to mods on discard about this pic which started calmly and ended calmly with me understanding the reasons why it was wrong of me to do what I did, the same conversation that led to its deletion.

you, however, did nothing to help by throwing wild accusations and choosing to be confrontational instead of giving a detailed explanation as to why the pic is not fit to be on the site, case and point is this very comment I'm replying to right now, it took you this long to do your job and actually explain the rules and the reasons why the post is not fit, and even then you do so with spite & bravado.

I suggest you request a demotion if you truly care for the integrity of this site.

winkywonker said:

I never said you abused any power because you have none, you're a builder, which means your only job is to flag bad posts and inform why if confronted about it by the uploader

I don't have to explain anything to uploaders. The only people whose opinions matter on whether something gets approved or not is Approvers.

I mean, to begin with, you don't even actually know I was the one that flagged it. How exactly are you supposed to confront the flagger if you don't even know who it was? Approvers can't even see that. You only guessed it was me because I commented before flagging it. I just didn't bother to deny it because I don't mind it being known.

you, however, did nothing to help by throwing wild accusations and choosing to be confrontational instead of giving a detailed explanation as to why the pic is not fit to be on the site, case and point is this very comment I'm replying to right now, it took you this long to do your job and actually explain the rules and the reasons why the post is not fit, and even then you do so with spite & bravado.

I explicitly stated multiple times that removing watermarks isn't acceptable. The fact it even needed to be explained to you that a slapdash watermark removal resulting in collateral damage isn't okay is the real concern here. It isn't my job to explain the rules, it's your job to read them in the first place so the rest of us don't have to explain something as basic as "don't modify the images before uploading them."

Forget about rules, anyone as dismissive towards art quality as you've been since you first started uploading is a bad fit for this site, especially if you're going to be ten times as confrontational as you insist I was being.

Edit: btw, retaliatory negative feedbacks are also against the rules.

blindVigil said:

I don't have to explain anything to uploaders. The only people whose opinions matter on whether something gets approved or not is Approvers.

you also don't have to be confrontational and escalate a situation, which is exactly what you did, which you could've avoided if you had explained from the get-go, but you didn't want to do that, so here we are.

blindVigil said:

I mean, to begin with, you don't even actually know I was the one that flagged it.

it doesn't matter who flagged it, you responded, and though I admit the flag was warranted, you're attitude is honestly what's escalated this more than anything.

blindVigil said:

I explicitly stated multiple times that removing watermarks isn't acceptable

you stated, you didn't explain, if you had explained without all of the bravado then this wouldn't be dragging on this long, and yes, the massive wall of text that is the rules does need to be explained sometimes, you've been on this site for 7 years so you should know by now that not everyone is gonna read all of that or that some may need reminding because they may not remember it all.

blindVigil said:

Forget about rules, anyone as dismissive towards art quality as you've been since you first started uploading is a bad fit for this site

art quality is a subjective matter, and my taste in art speaks for itself when only 54 out of the 317 posts I've uploaded so far are deleted, with the majority of those deleted being from when I first started uploading because of how I was uploading at first. needless to say, this is all still new to me, but I'd say I'm getting the hang of it despite this hiccup, from this experience I'll have to remember to talk to the discord server first before making decisions like this in the future.

winkywonker said:

you also don't have to be confrontational and escalate a situation, which is exactly what you did, which you could've avoided if you had explained from the get-go, but you didn't want to do that, so here we are.

you stated, you didn't explain, if you had explained without all of the bravado then this wouldn't be dragging on this long, and yes, the massive wall of text that is the rules does need to be explained sometimes, you've been on this site for 7 years so you should know by now that not everyone is gonna read all of that or that some may need reminding because they may not remember it all.

Remember months ago when I explained why you shouldn't upload images you've had on your hard drive for so long that the source doesn't even match anymore? Because we want the exact same image as is at the source? It really shouldn't be necessary to explain that going a step further and intentionally altering an image so that it doesn't match the source is also not okay.

The upload rules are not a massive wall of text. They are two lists, one of things not to do, and one of things that you should think twice before doing.

And I really don't think you're in any place to be pointing fingers about being confrontational and escalating, you didn't exactly ask "why?" at any point, you just argued with me, eventually resorting to direct insults, and insisted there was nothing wrong with what you did. At no point have you acted as if you were just going to accept being talked down. My second comment mentioned third-party edits being against the rules. Your response was to dismiss that because not all third-party edits are deleted. You dismissed the rules immediately, and that doesn't strike you as a problem?

blindVigil said:

Remember months ago when I explained why you shouldn't upload images you've had on your hard drive for so long that the source doesn't even match anymore? Because we want the exact same image as is at the source? It really shouldn't be necessary to explain that going a step further and intentionally altering an image so that it doesn't match the source is also not okay.

sometimes, people forget things.

blindVigil said:

And I really don't think you're in any place to be pointing fingers about being confrontational and escalating, you didn't exactly ask "why?" at any point

I admit I was confrontational, but you chose to react instead of explaining, that's on you.

winkywonker said:

I admit I was confrontational, but you chose to react instead of explaining, that's on you.

What is there to explain? Removing watermarks is against the rules. What else could you possibly need to know? I even provided a reason why it's bad.

blindVigil said:

so you assumed that I read the rules, that's on you.

from my perspective, I was just trying to upload a post that isn't ruined by a watermark being in the center of the pic, if you had explained the rules within your first reply I would've made my piece and it wouldn't have escalated.

winkywonker said:

so you assumed that I read the rules, that's on you.

from my perspective, I was just trying to upload a post that isn't ruined by a watermark being in the center of the pic, if you had explained the rules within your first reply I would've made my piece and it wouldn't have escalated.

What? This is ridiculous. Are you actually saying I'm at fault for expecting someone to have read the rules? I explained it IN THE SECOND REPLY. It doesn't matter if you read them or not at that point, I told you what the rules say. You just dismissed them, and proceeded to be combative, before I had even said anything that could be construed as an insult. And have since insulted me far more than I you, while pushing all responsibility onto me for your actions.

AND you made jabs at me in the discord server, so that's cool. I'm done with you.

winkywonker said:

you also don't have to be confrontational and escalate a situation, which is exactly what you did

That's his speciality, though.

blindVigil said:

Are you actually saying I'm at fault for expecting someone to have read the rules?

yes lmao

do you really think every person that creates an account on this site reads the full set of rules? are you fr?

blindVigil said:

I explained it IN THE SECOND REPLY.

yeah and you followed up with "anyone with eyes could tell" calling me blind

blatantly assuming that I had purposefully damaged the hair "How did you even manage to damage the hair?"

and then you insult the integrity of the site with "and if removing an artist's watermarks, and poorly at that, isn't, then this site really has gone to hell."

then in the replies following, you become snarky and sly "Is that good enough for you?"

and then you follow up by pretty much accusing me of being a vandal "Danbooru doesn't need your contributions if things like this are going to be a consistent problem with you."

telling me I shouldn't upload "All you've proven here is that you shouldn't be uploading here"

you straight up refuse to choose a more peaceful solution that'd deescalate the situation "I don't have to explain anything to uploaders"

what other reaction do you expect from me when you're coming at me like this?

winkywonker said:

do you really think every person that creates an account on this site reads the full set of rules? are you fr?

I know, right? How dare he expect uploaders to read the upload rules /sarcasm
The rules apply regardless of whether you read them or not, stop whining and making an ass out of yourself.

Incineration said:

The rules apply regardless of whether you read them or not

it's not a matter of the rules applying it's a matter of knowing what the rules are, if he had explained them in his first reply after saying "Don't do that." then this wouldn't have escalated, he's a ranked member of this site so he should know better than to assume & throw wild accusations.

but of course, I'm the asshole for expecting some common courtesy from a ranked member of the site, the nature of the internet is laid bare in this comment section.

winkywonker said:

it's not a matter of the rules applying it's a matter of knowing what the rules are, if he had explained them in his first reply after saying "Don't do that." then this wouldn't have escalated, he's a ranked member of this site so he should know better than to assume & throw wild accusations.

but of course, I'm the asshole for expecting some common courtesy from a ranked member of the site, the nature of the internet is laid bare in this comment section.

Dude, you didn't read the rules. You are in the wrong 100%. He could've spat and slapped on your face and you'd still be wrong at the end of the day because you are the rules violator.

Collapsible for everyone else's benefit. I'm done speaking to this hypocrite. "It was your choice to be confrontational and it's your fault I was confrontational."

winkywonker said:

but of course, I'm the asshole

Correct! I'm glad you realize it. You're the asshole. Try reading the rules next time before you upload. You're clearly capable of providing good uploads based on the parent post.

CitrusC said:

He could've spat and slapped on your face

and I would've shat on him in response

I violated rules I didn't know were there and for that, I apologize and will not do so again, I'm fine with taking an L

but again, what escalated it was never the flag, it was his attitude, if you want to help someone then help them without being snarky about it and using your assumptions as a foundation for your reasons on why you think I'm a rule violator when I've clearly followed rules I've never heard of for months now ever since I started uploading.

think blindvirgil, why would I all of a sudden start willingly breaking rules? which is what you assumed I was doing based on not just the blind presumptions you pulled out of your ass in this particular situation but also in previous situations as well where within which I wasn't breaking rules, I was just arguing on why certain posts of mine weren't approved, of which was also settled in discord.

IdiotsOpposite said:

Correct! I'm glad you realize it. You're the asshole. Try reading the rules next time before you upload. You're clearly capable of providing good uploads based on the parent post.

if an asshole is gonna be an asshole towards another asshole then it's just gonna turn into a shitfest, case and point.

but yes, I now know that this was wrong. I will do better next time, thank you for the praise.

blindVigil said:

you said you were done with me so keep to your word, I can't be asked with your bs anymore, you're way too emotional for the rank you hold.

Undeleted comments above at the request of the commenter.