# Filters, when?



## cobalt (May 29, 2007)

Are we going to be getting those content filters, that had been talked about previously? 

If so, how soon?

-c*


----------



## dave hyena (May 29, 2007)

The Filters are permanantly disabled in this version of FA.

(see http://www.furaffinity.net/controls/filters/)

I understand there will be some kind of filter(s), based on the tagging system, in the coming Ferrox update.

As it is, I think the filters were not working properly and would have required so much work to get them going again, it just wasn't worth it since the software that runs this verison of FA is rather creaky and it would be so much work that you might as well make a whole new software system for fa: Ferrox.


----------



## cobalt (May 29, 2007)

Dave Hyena said:
			
		

> The Filters are permanantly disabled in this version of FA.



Ok, so filters aren't coming any time soon.

Could there please be a ruling then, that scatological imagery not be allowed in thumbnail images? Wading thru Browse today was like russian roulette.


----------



## Nightingalle (May 29, 2007)

cobalt said:
			
		

> Dave Hyena said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Unfortunately, they can't say that.  If they did then I could come in here complaining about how I don't want to see anything of the scat, watersports, inflation, paw, vore, babyfur, macro/micro, etc 8|


----------



## cobalt (May 30, 2007)

kuronekotenshi said:
			
		

> Unfortunately, they can't say that.  If they did then I could come in here complaining about how I don't want to see anything of the scat, watersports, inflation, paw, vore, babyfur, macro/micro, etc 8|



Fine by me. If it's not possible for users to choose to filter out the disgustoporn, then the site admins should make it a rule, to keep it out of the thumbnail images. That still lets everyone post what they want, and when people use the browse function (since SEARCH also appears to be permenantly "coming soon") it won't be like walking through a mine field.


----------



## yak (May 30, 2007)

Porn is just.. well, pron....
I'm sorry, but your preference in the subject isn't in any way more creditable then the next guy, who might happen to like watersports or whatever, but dislike something that you are fine with. 

At this moment there isn't a way to precisely identify each type of art, or a fetish, or just about anything else bar the species dropdown lists - so the 'filter' is lacking the information to filter on.
And in general, there aren't going to be any grand changes about this version of the code, unless it'd be done as a beta-test of a subsystem that will be used for Ferrox.

[edit]
I also think that we are in no position to force every user to submit custom thumbnails for every single mature and adult submission they post on FA. It's just not right..


----------



## Arshes Nei (May 30, 2007)

I think however, during the great Cub Debate of FA, people were told to use filters if they didn't want to see cub porn. People were ok with that option, so I think FA does need to clarify a personal opinion over what was told to their users.

I am not trying to stir up that old debate, but people were given a "middle ground" it seems somewhat insensitive to not address it for so long.


----------



## cobalt (May 30, 2007)

Arshes Nei said:
			
		

> I am not trying to stir up that old debate, but people were given a "middle ground" it seems somewhat insensitive to not address it for so long.



Exactly. I don't want to open that hornet's nest up again, as we all saw how it turned out, but there really does need to be some kind of moderation in play. We were told there would be some, but there hasn't been any.

And for the record, washing your hands of the problem by quipping "porn is porn" is somewhat crass.


----------



## dave hyena (May 30, 2007)

cobalt said:
			
		

> there really does need to be some kind of moderation in play. We were told there would be some, but there hasn't been any.



It was said that there would be a filter system implemented, in November 2006:

http://www.furaffinityforums.net/showthread.php?tid=4257&pid=61767#pid61767

"In the near future we will implement a series of filters to allow people to block and exclude art of all content types, giving them better control of how they use the Fur Affinity service."

However I think that was before it was realised that the filter system in this current version of FA cannot be made to work right and the effort required to fix it (& some other things) would be so much, that it's easier to redo all the Fa software, i.e ferrox would not be just an upgrade, but a whole new system. 

Sadly, I think that like with the message centre being somewhat broken, we will have to wait on this one.

Also, I cannot find any reference to "moderation", just filters. The FA SA of course says that nothing which violates US law, federal or state (of new jersey) is allowed on FA anyway.


----------



## DarkMeW (May 30, 2007)

Arshes Nei said:
			
		

> I am not trying to stir up that old debate, but people were given a "middle ground" it seems somewhat insensitive to not address it for so long.



There was a lot of things brought up during the Cub debacle (I wouldn't call what most people were doing as 'debating') that were suppositively solutions for the people that never want to be subjected to see the sed images. I don't think one has ever been implemented on the site's side. However since the debate on the rare occasion I browse FA, I've found that most of the people creating the cub art create thumbnails that clearly say what the content is, so it's easily avoidable. Sadly not all of them are so polite to other FA users, which is one of the reasons I rarely browse the main site.


----------



## Arshes Nei (May 30, 2007)

Like you, I rarely browse the main site too. However, I find more frightening things than cub, and I find more Cub on FAP anyways, which is why I never move past my message center on there (not like everyone tags their stuff on FAP right anyways or tags at all past the required "mature"). I don't think there was a site that makes me feel as dirty as that one.


----------



## DarkMeW (May 30, 2007)

Arshes Nei said:
			
		

> Like you, I rarely browse the main site too. However, I find more frightening things than cub, and I find more Cub on FAP anyways, which is why I never move past my message center on there (not like everyone tags their stuff on FAP right anyways or tags at all past the required "mature"). I don't think there was a site that makes me feel as dirty as that one.




Unfortunately, I've run into several things that made me want to bore the image out of my head with a rusty drill bit on FA. Thumbnail images aren't always clear enough to see what you're getting into when you click on it and the people posting are rarely courteous enough to think of the ones that just want to look at some good art. Part of the reason I mentioned it is the fact I find that the people who do cub art are usually the ones to put clearly marked thumbnails up. On most of the bizarre horrible images there is little care towards anyone that doesn't want to see that kind of image. FA's system now is all or nothing, so yes browsing FA is like playing Russian roulette. Which makes me go back to my earlier idea of there should be four categories on FA (each filterable) general, adult, mature, and WTF. I don't hold any illusions of FA turning back towards being an art 'community' now, I'd just like to see some sort of damage control. 

I'd ask what site you are referring to from you mentioning of FAP but I have little desire to test my sanity.


----------



## dave hyena (May 31, 2007)

DarkMeW said:
			
		

> browsing FA is like playing Russian roulette. Which makes me go back to my earlier idea of there should be four categories on FA (each filterable) general, adult, mature, and WTF. I don't hold any illusions of FA turning back towards being an art 'community' now, I'd just like to see some sort of damage control.



Browsing Fur Affinity is in no way like doing something likely to result in your death, nor will it genuinely threaten your sanity. I don't think it helps when people exaggerate and chuck what are in theory very serious accusations around like they were candy. It cheapens them and obscures real debate under a cloud of subjectivity and emotive language.

Basically, there is a possibility that someone may, while using the browse function, see a thumbnail (no one was ever forced to click on a thumbnail) of an image which they personally find objectionable/disgusting/do not want etc and when the filters come back again, it will help solve this.


----------



## Muse (May 31, 2007)

Isn't FA just essentially a furry 'art community' if you turn off the  'veiw adult images' option?  

Sounds like people aren't actually after just an 'art community', but rather an 'art community that includes only the porn I like', which is an entirely different thing.


----------



## Arshes Nei (May 31, 2007)

Muse said:
			
		

> Isn't FA just essentially a furry 'art community' if you turn off the  'veiw adult images' option?
> 
> Sounds like people aren't actually after just an 'art community', but rather an 'art community that includes only the porn I like', which is an entirely different thing.



I dunno about that, because the mature and adult are mixed as one filter. I don't see how nudity isn't art. Granted there are erotic pieces with really big artistic appeal, I just don't see why turning off one thing that also eliminates other kinds of art means it's now an art community.


----------



## Wolfblade (May 31, 2007)

As Dave and yak said, Filters just aren't a plausible option right now. They're on the Ferrox wish list, but I think fewer promises are going to be made for a while until everyone is more certain that they can be delivered.

Separating Mature from Adult has also been suggested many times before, but in practice, it would just be one more area of moderation added to an already short-handed staff. Too many users simply do not understand the difference between mature and adult, with many users having the two completely reversed. Both understaffing AND more clarified user guidelines are matters that are presently being worked on. Of course we would all like things to move faster, but well, hasty responses to user complaints that require site-wide change have tended to get less than pleasant responses. We're trying to be more aware of the ENTIRE userbase's feelings, and not JUST the people who are complaining.

Everyone on the staff wants this community to grow and improve, but please remember: for every person complaining, there's who knows how many people perfectly content. We want to improve and fix the things people are unhappy with, but we have to do so in a way that isn't going to upset a larger number of people who really weren't bothered by the problem as much as they end up being bothered by the "solution."


----------



## DarkMeW (Jun 1, 2007)

Dave Hyena said:
			
		

> Browsing Fur Affinity is in no way like doing something likely to result in your death, nor will it genuinely threaten your sanity. I don't think it helps when people exaggerate and chuck what are in theory very serious accusations around like they were candy. It cheapens them and obscures real debate under a cloud of subjectivity and emotive language.



You're perfectly welcome to feel that way, I however do not, as my recent trip through the browse system just proved. Just as you can feel free and take the comparison of Russian roulette (that was an obvious comment about the surprise in unexpected content) and get bent out of shape exclaiming that I was saying FA is going to kill everyone. For some one that is getting bent over what, you say, are exaggerations, you don't seem to mind tossing in them when ever it pleases your self. 



			
				Dave Hyena said:
			
		

> Basically, there is a possibility that someone may, while using the browse function, see a thumbnail (no one was ever forced to click on a thumbnail) of an image which they personally find objectionable/disgusting/do not want etc and when the filters come back again, it will help solve this.



You are side skirting what I was saying. I was talking about thumbnails that quite often you can't tell the content until you click on it, and alluding it to a previous post by Cobalt. Only I set it up in a specific circumstances, which was quite CLEARLY laid out. I think the problem here is the candy you mentioned, is the people that feel the need to alter what is said until it fits something they can get an "emotive language" out of rather then confront it at face value. 

The fact of the matter is, right now, FA doesn't differentiate between a cheese cake image and (to use an example from my last browsing trip on FA) a image of two seven year olds having forced anal sex with things as big as their heads. There is a clear and distinct problem when a site doesn't have the ability to separate an artist adult work and something that would make people question sanity if not of themselves then of the ones that created it. It is all or nothing on FA, so it's not even a question of if a person likes that type of image, they still HAVE to see it if they are browsing without everything other then PG turned off. Sadly there IS no exaggeration there David. Sometimes you don't see images as such and then sometimes it's one after another. So it isn't a question of what type of artwork holds the greatest numbers, it's a question that there is no control over what you see and (what I was talking about earlier) there is no control over if thumbnails should clearly state or show what the content is. Especially when it's a page of several sketches, there isn't enough detail in a thumb to know the content. That is why some people view browsing on FA (as previous posts had stated) as Russian roulette or walking in a mine field. Sometimes those images can hit you suddenly and hard and there is no control over when they do pop up.

There is no time table on any sort of filter system and it's something that has been held over people's head as a ghostly solution since last year. Believe me I wish there was a filtering system that made sense, because I would actually like to give constructive critiques and view some new good artwork, but I can't do it as FA is now with out running into things that do make me feel like vomiting. And Dave there is again NO exaggeration there. It's fine if you or anyone else likes to see any sort of image that FA allows David, I don't have a problem with that. It's the fact that the ones that don't have no real options at thier dispossale other then burying thier heads in the sand. 

Please, spare me the "no one was ever forced to click on it", I view that as right up there with a troll saying "no one is forced to read it"Â Â and still doesn't relate to what I was saying. (I'm not saying you are a troll there David, I know you are a very active and constructive member of FA, even if I don't agree with your reaction to my post.) 



			
				Muse said:
			
		

> Sounds like people aren't actually after just an 'art community', but rather an 'art community that includes only the porn I like', which is an entirely different thing.



I don't particularly like porn. Although I can appreciate the aesthetics or technical qualities of some pornographic works. I however don't think adult artwork has to be directly related and chained to porn, since there is a clear distinction between pin-up or cheese cake images and pornographic or extreme fetishes, unless of course you are browsing FA.


----------



## uncia (Jun 1, 2007)

Wolfblade said:
			
		

> As Dave and yak said, Filters just aren't a plausible option right now. They're on the Ferrox wish list, but I think fewer promises are going to be made for a while until everyone is more certain that they can be delivered.
> 
> Separating Mature from Adult has also been suggested many times before, but in practice, it would just be one more area of moderation added to an already short-handed staff. Too many users simply do not understand the difference between mature and adult, with many users having the two completely reversed. Both understaffing AND more clarified user guidelines are matters that are presently being worked on. Of course we would all like things to move faster, but well, *hasty* responses to user complaints that require site-wide change have tended to get less than pleasant responses. We're trying to be more aware of the ENTIRE userbase's feelings, and not JUST the people who are complaining.
> 
> Everyone on the staff wants this community to grow and improve, but please remember: for every person complaining, there's who knows how many people perfectly content. We want to improve and fix the things people are unhappy with, but we have to do so in a way that isn't going to upset a larger number of people who really weren't bothered by the problem as much as they end up being bothered by the "solution."


_(emphasis mine)_

"hasty..."? 
Even Treebeard would be fidgeting his branches by now... ^^

How about a little bit more honesty (in addition to those fewer hollow promises, which is a good start) and less PR spin in responses to such perennial questions? Not that that's not half-decent PR spin, at least... heh.

=
(aside: I don't know what you mean 'bout "separating Mature from Adult...would just be one more area of moderation added to an already short-handed staff". They already _are_ split and you've only notionally increased the work and confusion by unilaterally changing the definition of Mature & Adult so that that's less consistent across FA's timeframe than it was before, then applying less admin effort to those new "boundaries").


----------



## dave hyena (Jun 1, 2007)

DarkMeW said:
			
		

> You're perfectly welcome to feel that way, I however do not, as my recent trip through the browse system just proved. Just as you can feel free and take the comparison of Russian roulette (that was an obvious comment about the surprise in unexpected content) and get bent out of shape exclaiming that I was saying FA is going to kill everyone.



Right, So I assume the most practical solution to this problem, if even a thumbnail is causing you to feel genuine physical distress, is to have a selective filtering system which allows filtering by kink & making sure that people tag their work work properly.

Without a selective filtering system, if one finds certain thumbnails physically distressing, one cannot stop from seeing a thumbnail if one is using the browse facility, therefore it is not fair to tell people to not look, because they cannot stop from seeing the thumbnails. 

Of course, the problem is we don't know when the filters/ferrox will arrive. A possible palliative could be a progress update report on Ferrox. Avoiding making any promises about time and features but saying what has been done and what remains to be done with caveats as appropriate.


----------



## Arshes Nei (Jun 1, 2007)

uncia said:
			
		

> (aside: I don't know what you mean 'bout "separating Mature from Adult...would just be one more area of moderation added to an already short-handed staff". They already _are_ split and you've only notionally increased the work and confusion by unilaterally changing the definition of Mature & Adult so that that's less consistent across FA's timeframe than it was before, then applying less admin effort to those new "boundaries").



One of the biggest issues is, why even bother having the rating if people are going to make excuses about it? I don't think I'm disagreeing with you here, when it sounds more like a "passing of the buck" rather than going, "You know what, you're right, this is our site and we need to give better guidelines between the two" 

There isn't a middle ground for something that is separated as a rating, but is lumped together in your user preferences file .."mature filers on/off"

A nude model study is lumped together with shitting dicknipples. Last I recalled figure drawing classes didn't have extendo-inflation cock in the course.


----------



## uncia (Jun 1, 2007)

Arshes Nei said:
			
		

> I don't think I'm disagreeing with you here, when it sounds more like a "passing of the buck"


I believe the phrase is "waiting for Preyfar".



			
				Arshes Nei said:
			
		

> A nude model study is lumped together with shitting dicknipples. Last I recalled figure drawing classes didn't have extendo-inflation cock in the course.


*g*... a classic example. I trust the former is still "Mature", whilst the latter is "Adult"?

That aside, the most notable change in the ratings (still under discussion?) was to apparently lump all higher degrees of violence under "mature" rather than split between "mature" and "adult" (for high-gore content). Don't know to what degree that's being applied, but would be fairly sure it wasn't retroacted for the previous 300,000 submissions.



			
				Arshes Nei said:
			
		

> There isn't a middle ground for something that is separated as a rating, but is lumped together in your user preferences file .."mature filers on/off"


*nods*. Mature/adult at present is only really of limited use (e.g. as a "warning" when browsing thumbs) whilst there is no user pref. toggling that could be "sensibly" enacted with that degree of lumping. Separating violence & sexual content as a half-way house to full tag implementation might've made more sense for that (per http://www.furaffinityforums.net/showthread.php?tid=2797&pid=33574#pid33574 & other discussions), but was left on the sidelines.

Given the apparent uncertainty and changing low-profile guidelines without so much as a mouseover on the submissions screen, at least there's not a particularly banhammer approach to any "apparent" violations of rating. I suspect that (understandably) irks some people, but does keep the general potential for drama relatively low.

That's as an aside to the overarching "content filters" query, of course...

02c perspective from the sidelines anyhow, fwiw,
David.


----------



## Arshes Nei (Jun 1, 2007)

uncia said:
			
		

> Arshes Nei said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I suppose so seeing how many of the Users lying about their age thread is being handled.

Especially with way this particular case was handled. Which was not at all.

I guess FA is gonna be like Congress, lots of legislation battles but nothing will be done, and usually when it is, it's to a user's chagrin XD


----------



## dave hyena (Jun 1, 2007)

Arshes Nei said:
			
		

> Especially with way this particular case was handled. Which was not at all.



approxmiate time since user last +fav'ed an adult image: 3 hours.

approximate time since user was reported: 312 hours.


----------



## uncia (Jun 1, 2007)

Dave Hyena said:
			
		

> approxmiate time since user last +fav'ed an adult image: 3 hours.
> 
> approximate time since user was reported: 312 hours.



OT: timeless...


----------



## Wolfblade (Jun 2, 2007)

Okay, many concerns/implications brought up, so lots to respond to...



			
				uncia said:
			
		

> "hasty..."?
> Even Treebeard would be fidgeting his branches by now... ^^
> 
> How about a little bit more honesty (in addition to those fewer hollow promises, which is a good start) and less PR spin in responses to such perennial questions? Not that that's not half-decent PR spin, at least... heh.



Oh believe me, he's not the only one fidgeting. I've wanted a comprehensive filter system on a gallery site for as long as anyone. It was one of the things I'd tried pushing hardest for back when another site had been in development, to much opposition at the time. I also think it was the primary draw and appeal of Y-Gallery.

That doesn't mean I want them to slap on some quick-fix crappy bugged-filled temporary filter system only to have it cause more problems that will upset a great deal more users than the ones (myself included) who are presently wishing for filters.

You should know as well as anyone that things take time when you're dealing with an entirely volunteer staff maintaining a site that has not been known for it's stability. FA has slowly but steadily been improving upon its problems, and nobody can argue that it is not significantly more stable and functional than it was when it first re-launched.

If anyone knows any professional-level coders willing to donate inordinate amounts of their free time (and who don't find amusement in malicious hacking or trolling when their 'helpful advice' is not immediately taken), I'll be the first to push for expanding the coder team to see more progress made. But established history has shown that trust with site code is not something FA should hand out lightly. 

As for honesty, well, there is a difference between lying and simply withholding information that is incomplete or still in discussion and isn't ready to be handed out. I had felt being more forthcoming with pending information would help calm some user upsets. My very first attempt at being more forthcoming was a rather harsh lesson in how sometimes users do NOT need to be given an answer that is not yet set in stone. 

You should also know how users can take a casual toss-out statement of something to come and twist it into a prophecy of inevitable doom for us all. Part of lessening the empty promises is also lessening the amount of "oh, we might do this or that," etc, statements the administration makes which then get taken as promises that end up being empty as they had only been intended as casual statements to begin with. 



> (aside: I don't know what you mean 'bout "separating Mature from Adult...would just be one more area of moderation added to an already short-handed staff". They already _are_ split and you've only notionally increased the work and confusion by unilaterally changing the definition of Mature & Adult so that that's less consistent across FA's timeframe than it was before, then applying less admin effort to those new "boundaries").



I meant separating them as in, rather than a single on/off "mature" filter, giving users a separate option to turn off either mature OR adult labeled artwork.



			
				uncia said:
			
		

> Arshes Nei said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Because Preyfar single-handedly performs every duty on the site? You told me I was wrong to assume you have some personal beef with him, but forgive me if I feel that you do little to lessen the amount of evidence backing that opinion.

More to the point: Yes, it can be very frustrating working around the often conflicting time restraints of the various members of staff. Some days everyone happens to be on all at once, and things seem to move nicely, while other days nobody is available and things appear to come to a standstill.

As Lead Admin, Preyfar's time constraints can be particularly frustrating, but oh yes, that's right, it is the job that he is doing during the time he is not here that pays for a far from insignificant amount of this place's expenses. Surely we could get more progress made if he quit his job, but I doubt it would offset the sadness of the community shutting down entirely simply from sudden lack of funds.



			
				uncia said:
			
		

> Arshes Nei said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



That link appears to be an example of a mistake that was acknowledged, would have been corrected had the user not left the community of their own choice, and in which you express strong suggestion for many attitudes of policy that would be lovely to have if this site simply had the manpower to deliver them, which you should know; we do not.

As you say yourself in that thread: "There's never going to be a zero problem rate on this issue, alas; and managing the user/admin relationship can be as large a factor in many cases, I'd've thought.

aside: If there are a larger number of "age ratings", there will also be more possibilities for debate/argument over those "shades of grey" between each."

The administration does what it can to moderate this site, but mistakes WILL be made, and if given the chance, they will be corrected. You also acknowledge how giving one user what they want can often open more room for confusion/conflict from other users who had been fine with things as they were. I am personally making an effort to push for more awareness and acknowledgment of the significant role user/admin relations has played in the history of this site in the hopes that it will play a better role in the site's future. Patience and occasional benefit of the doubt will be greatly helpful to that movement.



			
				uncia said:
			
		

> That aside, the most notable change in the ratings (still under discussion?) was to apparently lump all higher degrees of violence under "mature" rather than split between "mature" and "adult" (for high-gore content). Don't know to what degree that's being applied, but would be fairly sure it wasn't retroacted for the previous 300,000 submissions.



Forgive me if I am wrong in feeling that you are implying we should go back through 300,000 submissions to change their filters to reflect that small change. To do so would require a certain amount of time. Time which could be spent on managing more current or prominent matters. Or time which could be spent answering user complaints/concerns.

Here's an odd conundrum: when we focus on simply dealing with voiced complaints, and correcting submissions, etc, it generally leaves little visible response made to the users. When we try to ensure user concerns get an administrative response, we consume time that COULD be used to actually address the issue of their concerns, and the concerns of others.

Most of the admins tend to do their work, but not always leave a visible response to the users on it. I have been trying to leave more visible Admin acknowledgment to the users, something that has significantly waned in your absence, but it leaves me with little time to help the others tackle the work to do on the site. Whichever choice we make to spend our time on, we will be criticized for not also doing the other.

For example, issues get pointed out that tend to sit unattended for longer than anyone here would like. If an admin tries to tackle the issues single-handedly, the slightest mistake results in ridiculously enormous backlash from users, with criticisms from people with the benefit of hindsight who don't have to actually DO any of this (something I was guilty of myself before, but you have already BEEN in this position, so your lack of understanding is confusing to say the least). If the admin tries to wait until they have sufficient aid from another admin, users complain that the issues are ignored and brushed off. 

So, the ideal solution would be to do whatever we feel will best help the site overall, and for users to simply have faith that we are doing everything that is reasonable to demand of us to try and keep this place running and improving, however gradual the improvements may be.

But nothing is ideal in the world we live in, now is it? So I guess we all have to accept some imperfection, and try to be more constructive with our criticisms as opposed to being merely deconstructive and judgmental. But even then, hey, we're only human, right?


----------



## DarkMeW (Jun 2, 2007)

Dave Hyena said:
			
		

> Right, So I assume the most practical solution to this problem, if even a thumbnail is causing you to feel genuine physical distress, is to have a selective filtering system which allows filtering by kink & making sure that people tag their work work properly.
> 
> Without a selective filtering system, if one finds certain thumbnails physically distressing, one cannot stop from seeing a thumbnail if one is using the browse facility, therefore it is not fair to tell people to not look, because they cannot stop from seeing the thumbnails.
> 
> Of course, the problem is we don't know when the filters/ferrox will arrive. A possible palliative could be a progress update report on Ferrox. Avoiding making any promises about time and features but saying what has been done and what remains to be done with caveats as appropriate.



I would love at least a filtering system that I could use to at least filter a few categories in the adult/mature. Not having any way of knowing when or if a filter system that was presented as a possible cure all during the 'debacle' last year, there is nothing the people that thought it would be around by now can do. If you recall their was a considerable amount of people that was fine with cub art being allowed  because  there was going to be a filter system, in some case presented as the solution to the whole debate. 

With the filter system being currently problematic, it's left to the users to create any sort of filtering system. I myself had thought about creating a tutorial on creating 'courtesy thumbnails,' but since I avoid the pornographic and fetishes here, I don't know enough to create an easily useable and understandable system. ^.^! even the abbreviations of some of the fetish confuse me, let alone when it's just a string of letters. The idea was to at least encourage the use, in hope to increase the number of users that would create identifiable thumbnails without showing all the content. At least that's idea is starting on some sort of middle ground filtering system, even if it is on a voluntary basis. It would be great if something like that would get some official push with out being required. Since that is less problematic then anything in place or planned and doesn't require any sort of moderating since it's just something that is encouraged people use. At least that was a possible short term solution I've been thinking about. 

Anyway, I had more to say about it but right now I'm just really tired.


----------



## cobalt (Jun 2, 2007)

Just for the record, this is how I have been rating my own work:

Adult: Contains imagery of an explicit sexual nature
Mature: Contains nudity or implied sexuality
General: No Nudity, or sex

I think I've managed to stick to that. 

Is there really no difference between the way the sytem handles items marked Mature or Adult?


----------



## Arshes Nei (Jun 2, 2007)

Two posts above, to Wolfblade's reply.

I'm looking at uncia's post and he was saying fairly. Which means it wasn't going to be retroactive (unless someone happens to stumble on a submission flagged incorrectly). 

What I see is him saying to get the standards out, and let people know what they are, from then on, get admins/moderators to moderate.

I think there's another response of shooting yourself in the foot, by saying the admins are now working on other important matters. What exactly are these important matters? This is just regular duty of work. Why did they add on more admins anyway if it's just the same sob story? I know the site is still shortstaffed, but I would expect some steps to make their way through, not another big standstill :/


----------



## uncia (Jun 2, 2007)

*g*... apols & much <3 to the dodgy 'unread post' flags for me not spotting those replies until the last two. Some things never change, I guess.

Thanks for the thoughts/feedback. 

@ Wolfblade:
The comments around http://www.furaffinityforums.net/showthread.php?tid=2797&pid=33574#pid33574 weren't replied to, btw. For lack of any other forthcoming explanation (if Arshes on the ToS team is unaware of this, I guess the rest of the community is, too), you've still apparently needlessly and unilaterally(?) rewritten the maturity categories and thus created a rod for your own back. Even if you wish to label that as a 'small change' in order to brush the matter aside. (I'd guess a few hundred submissions, off-the-cuff, fwiw).
It's now two months since you wrote 'we'll see what the behind-the-scenes crew says and any additional points made here I'll post over there as well' in response to http://www.furaffinityforums.net/showthread.php?tid=6846&pid=128755#pid128755 . Would guess that means no reply.

Anyhow; even if that was actually a *necessary* change to the maturity classifications, which I doubt, there was at least one member of the admin team who explicitly stated they were primarily going to deal with fixing past-issues on an ad-hoc basis rather than ongoing high-involvement matters owing to their personal time commitments. Smart move, IMHO, despite your denigration of anyone in the admin team 'wasting' their time on that rather than 'managing more current or prominent matters'. Horses for courses; jus' need more good horses. ^^

Still doesn't answer any questions on filters, but I guess any indication on Ferrox timescales might be a better pointer to that than such generic discussion.

=
Thanks for getting the following right, anyhow, WB; _*nods*_ nothing personal against Preyfar, as opposed to the results of some of his actions/inactions/decisions/indecisions and the manner in which his profile magnifies anything either positive or negative.
As y'know, there's a lot more to it than that, of course, but that's by-the-by in order to keep discussions focused on the constructive/relatively drama-free.

As opposed to


			
				Wolfblade said:
			
		

> As Lead Admin, Preyfar's time constraints can be particularly frustrating, but oh yes, that's right, it is the job that he is doing during the time he is not here that pays for a far from insignificant amount of this place's expenses. Surely we could get more progress made if he quit his job, but I doubt it would offset the sadness of the community shutting down entirely simply from sudden lack of funds.



/That/ is hype with incitement to drama, btw, in case you didn't realise.

Regards,
David.


----------



## Wolfblade (Jun 2, 2007)

All right, in all honesty: I don't think anyone is more irritated than I am over the stalled issue of getting visible standards out. I'm really quite peeved about it.

But there ARE other concerns right now that are over-riding that, and as much as I would really love to just finish with the job I'd started on, I would rather make sure that any actions we're doing over the next few months are done thoughtfully and carefully, to keep user reaction down to a minimum of flailing. ANY change has met with excessive upset from users, made worse in no small part by people who paint the administration's motivations as something evil and backstabbing and putting forth slippery-slope arguments about how 'if they do this, next they're going to do that, and then that, etc' until we're eating everyone's babies.

Exaggeration I know, but honestly, what do you guys suggest we do? In the past, admin actions have too often been hasty, in an effort to meet user concerns quickly to make people happy. That has not had the greatest track record of success. So to address the concerns of poor user relations and knee-jerk reactions, we are attempting to be more aware of what we say and how we say it, and we are taking our time to make sure what happens is what everyone on staff feels is the best way for it to happen, with the least chance of user upset and the greatest chance for long-term enjoyment of the site. Doing things the way users want as fast as they want has caused more problems more often than it has just addressed the issues at hand.

Neither of you were very happy overall with how things have been done on this site for the most part (nor was I honestly), but now they're trying to do things a little differently. It'd really be great if we could ask for a little patience, just bear with us, and see how things go from here. If we still end up messing up, I'm sure you guys will call us on it, and hell, I'll probably be as cranky as you are about it.

But in the meantime, I really do think everyone on staff is eager to be better about the areas that have typically been seen as less than ideal, and I want to see if we can keep this attitude going. :3


----------



## uncia (Jun 2, 2007)

Wolfblade said:
			
		

> All right, in all honesty: I don't think anyone is more irritated than I am over the stalled issue of getting visible standards out. I'm really quite peeved about it.



_*nods*_
(And if anyone actually /is/ more irritated, I don't think I'd like to be crossing them in a dark street, 'Blade...).



			
				Wolfblade said:
			
		

> But in the meantime, I really do think everyone on staff is eager to be better about the areas that have typically been seen as less than ideal, and I want to see if we can keep this attitude going. :3



Sounds good to me. 
Still hoping; and certainly need a positive approach to that on which to build - _regardless_ of the timeframe.


----------



## Ashkihyena (Jun 14, 2007)

So, basically filters are just like the search engine and groups, never going to happen.


----------



## Wolfblade (Jun 14, 2007)

Ashkihyena said:
			
		

> So, basically filters are just like the search engine and groups, never going to happen.



If previous responses to the contrary are to be ignored or disbelieved anyway, then yes, sure, go with that. :3

The question has been asked and answered countless times, and the answer is, sadly, not changing just because it hasn't made anyone happy. Filters will happen when they happen, which is going to be at precisely the point in the future when every concern that is more pressing has been taken care of, and our coders have had the time to do whatever coding needs to be done to implement a filter system that will not simply muck up currently working systems.

If you want to believe that means never, then sadly there's not much I can do to convince anyone otherwise.

A More Appealing answer than that simply does not exist, as much as I would love to give you one.


----------



## Ashkihyena (Jun 15, 2007)

So...yes, that means that the filters and the other two things are never going to happen.


----------



## blueroo (Jun 15, 2007)

Ashkihyena said:
			
		

> So...yes, that means that the filters and the other two things are never going to happen.



Look. This question has been answered for you. At this point, you either either trying to stir up drama or trying to be difficult. Either way, I'm now asking you to stop. No more posts about search, groups, and filtering.


----------



## Ashkihyena (Jun 15, 2007)

No, I'm just wanting filters for the objectionable material that passes the site.  As I said on the other post, its sad that a site run by assholes has a filtering system, and yet, this one doesn't.


----------



## Wolfblade (Jun 15, 2007)

No amount of complaining will magically conjure up a working filter system. You were given an answer, you chose to ignore it, you were asked by an admin to let it drop, and you chose to ignore that as well. You seem more than capable of ignoring statements directed specifically to you, so I'm sure you can manage to ignore any objectionable material out there that isn't aimed at you or anyone in particular.


----------

