Explanation of update to Rule #0 for consistency and clarity especially in regards to racism

In regards to deletions, I think there might be one that was done too hastily that will probably be restored. There are some other images being looked at right away, but I’m trying to make sure we prioritize the worst stuff.
 
I would like to remind people this thread is not a general complaining about moderation or questions thread. We have IRC and the Discord server if people have questions.

@Princess Luna  
I happen to know a lot of people who have been censored for their opinion out of speaking in the discord server by this point. You cannot present this as a shield against criticism if you don’t accept criticism there as well, or at least not in this way. It places your actions and yourself and the modstaff above reproach, which is counter at best to any arguments you could potentially make that the staff care about what the community has to say.
 
If this is a place to discuss the rule#0 changes, then that must necessarily include complaining about the uneven enforcement of the rule as I’ve clarified countless times to no answer. I’m tempted to try my hand at the discord or IRC myself, but I’m a little wary as I’ve seen some unscrupulous things come out of both of them and I am struggling to believe I would even be responded to at this point, seeing as how every time I hit on a point I’m completely ignored.

@TheDrizzle404
 
Very well said.

@Princess Luna
 
Unfortunately, a lot of people on Discord has been noted to be silenced when trying to bring the themes around.  
In all honestly, I think it looks more like if the decition is set in stone and the staff doesn’t really understand the user’s feedback.  
As I can see, most people are not really happy with the rework of the rule so I think you should take that into account, or else this continuous riffs will keep going and less people are going to recognize your authority. There’s an old saying: “The easiest way to respect rules consist in making the rules respectable by themselves.”

@Princess Luna  

 
So, would an image like this I presume be at risk? >>1487723 (deleted) While something like this not be, because it is clearly a more joking context, >>2365442
 
You said you were going after low quality imagery that counted as propaganda. Would these images, in spite of their joking context, be considered somewhere along the edge do to the presence of such things as “seige hail”? >>1977649 >>2337074 (deleted) >>2337074 (deleted) I’m just trying to get a sense of the edge cases.

I opened a report because it’s pretty clear thanks to the similar downvotes that people are downvoting as the pictures arrive (you can even tell which waves happened when thanks to how far apart the difference in downvotes are)
 
I was told nothing was happening (clear lie or blissful ignorance?), Which is obviously untrue
 
Now the real question on everyone’s mind is: will the staff uphold the “whining about filterable content” rule as hard as they did during the BLM mess or are they gonna prove what we’ve all been knowing anyway? Cos the message I’m getting right now from the staff member who ‘helped’ me is “it’s ok that it’s being downvote spammed because they’re being downvoted as they arrive”

@Datte-Before-Dawn  
According to Derpy they are not using the tool and he had mistakenly thought they had removed it.
 
@Derpy Whooves  

 
My question is when does this tool come into force? At what level of downvoting?
 
Also, If this discussion is too off topic than may I make another thread for it?

>>2421475 (deleted) was deleted due to “rule#0-bait”
 
Where did that pic broke rule 0#? It was just ponies helping each other on lifeboats. It was not some low edit shitpost it was nicely drawn original image.

@CHurricane  
Yeah I am wondering that too, especially considering other pics with a similar topic/theme are still around. That one was actually pretty well-drawn and all.

@CHurricane  
Yea, this is just getting ridiculous. When staff specifically said something that low quality and provocative was up for deletion, few people if any had issues with the wording, it was all about how staff would enforce it. Its exactly what I was worried about, an inconsistency in rules enforcement.

@CHurricane
 
Well, it was probably because of the message.  
Was really called for it? Not at all, the site is having problems regarding the fanbase but I don’t think it warranted a deletion.

@Datte-Before-Dawn
 
The wording of “Rule #0 - bait” is really bad in my opinion. The word “bait” would imply that it is about this part of rule 0:
 
 
“Do not post content whose only apparent purpose is inciting anger, arguments, or controversy.”
 
But if that picture is a sign of what is interpreted as being made only to incite anger then there are thousands of other images that should be gone from this site.(if rule enforcement is suposed to be consistent)

@CHurricane  

 
My concern with that is stuff like the chonicling of the Twilicorn drama. A lot of history could be lost if that is enforced broadly.

While i am already (again) invested in this thread i would also like to repeat one of my questions(that might have been accidentaly missed by staff) about rule 0 enforcement:
 

 
I would also like to point out that that pic (beside clearly inciting violence) is also clearly made to “incite anger, arguments, or controversy”

@CHurricane  
It is still in the queue of images to review. No promises on when we’ll get to it.

@Derpy Whooves  
What’s the size of this queue, in terms of the amount of images under review?