Posts

@Myoozik  
 

 
Post search search still exists and works. We’re aware people aren’t fans of the new interface and there’s already a feature ticket to make it similar to the old forum search.

@Penguin Dragneel  
I thought that was established ages ago.
 
This thread is almost entirely circlejerk complaints about fud and nonsense, discussing things “nicely” never goes anywhere.

@Penguin Dragneel  
Maybe you didn’t, but Cyborg did with saying “So Blizzard’s Done it again.”, and as a rule of thumb you just echo whatever he tries to get people mad about here.
 
 
As for whether it’s “legit” or not, it’s either the world’s laziest bait or the words of a stupid child not worth paying attention to.

@Penguin Dragneel  
It’s not a post by staff, just some rando on their forums,
 
It lists Junkrat and Winston as “black”.
 
It’s bait.

@Penguin Dragneel  
It’s a bait post, dude.

@Cyborg_pony  
That’s just some rando’s post, it looks like… Probably trying to bait.

@dissociativity  
tbh I imagine a lot of it is concern trolling from people that just want to see her cancelled for being vocally left of center and opened herself to attack with that moronic “article”.

@Background Pony #DE0C  
I didn’t know Fimfiction had forums. I only have a The Smiling Pony (not sure how it was spelled or shortened) account there that I used to post on one guy’s blog for I can’t even remember what reason; fics aren’t my thing.

@Mikey  
If you don’t know you’re much better off that way.

And then there was Jin…

@Background Pony #FA71  
Every example account that’s stated they only had one downvote has turned out to not be so.

@Background Pony #FA71  
The filters currently apply to the black lives matter, acab, and george floyd protests tags as those were identified as the ones being hit the hardest by people with otherwise no/low downvoting behavior or hit by people in their entirety. Some unique image IDs are also listed to avoid tagging shenanigans should tags not be locked.
 
 
@Boxless  
@Background Pony #FA71
 
Most mods don’t care about this thread, most of the ones that do only care about the topics they’re knowledgeable in or care about. The few of us that can answer most anything, such as myself, don’t stay monitor the site 24/7, let alone this thread, and sometimes when we are on the site, we even try to enjoy it ourselves instead of dealing with the issue of the day. As well, this particular topic isn’t on the top of the list for things we have to deal with as staff, and it’s certainly not as urgent as other matters we have to attend to day by day.
 
If you want answers to your speculations:
 

@WhiteCheddaPikachu  
Check your current active filter, the tags will be in the Hidden Tags box.

@Background Pony #B75A  
You would have to wait for byte[] or Joey, as they worked on it while I blissfully slept through the night. I’m not sure they’d be inclined to provide it, though, given some would immediately check to see how to game it in the (hopefully unnecessary) event of a second run.

@Boxless  
The list was the result of a complex query; in that sense it was automatic and the query may not have been perfect. However there is no system that automatically flags a user on voting.
 
We do not at present have user/role specific banners. From our experience running banners for site downtimes and OC collaborations, people seem either completely blind to them, or become extremely annoyed by them.

@Background Pony #3AF5  
A number of your questions have been addressed in another thread and I tire of repeating myself in the same thread nevermind multiple.
 
As for your voting patterns, we can only see what we can see, and that’s that the near entirety of a tag was downvoted with almost nothing else touched in the space of a week. It’s practically a textbook scenario for what the policy is meant to address. If you absolutely still do want to see those images, then I imagine you can log off to have a look without the temptation of downvoting a content matter you know you don’t like, or wait a while for all this ruckus to pass.

@Background Pony #3AF5  
You’ve had very little activity on the site for months until this past week, and nearly all downvotes landed on the same pool of images. In fact, in the last month, you seemed to have downvoted 32 images, and 30 of those were BLM related.
 
That doesn’t point to the sort of activity you’re attributing to yourself.

@TheDrizzle404  
They’re not exhausting themselves, they’re exhausting and antagonizing other people because they refuse to filter or ignore things they don’t like.

@Background Pony #FA71  
We thought the language of “current events” was clear enough. No, none of this is indefinite, as we hope the current atmosphere of incendiary or trollish image and user activity won’t be.
 
We’ve seen that people will interpret whatever we say however they want, more often than not in the most insidious way possible, if not just outright baffling incorrectly, to create more of a fuss over something that affects a minority of people than we’d see from not making any announcements. If this policy and related feature were to affect even as much as 2% of the active users we would have said something more clearly on the site itself.

@Archonix  
People are using the term incorrectly. A shadow ban is where a user’s interactions are faked, only visible to themselves. What has been implemented now is a hard filter on certain tags for a number of users that seem to have extreme issue with the content of those tags yet refuse to filter them and instead downvote their contents. This was our alternative to issuing out bans for violating rule #6.
 
If people feel the hard filter should not have been applied to them they should report their accounts for review.

@Background Pony #FA71  
This policy is unlikely to continue for long. People have been on edge for months and triply so in the last week, with many taking it as an opportunity to cause unnecessary drama and aggravate people for the sake of it. Hopefully people calm down soon or at least lose the need to antagonize eachother as much.

@John Sheppard  
We’ve deleted several pro-BLM and “ACAB” images. We don’t publicize deletions, and there doesn’t appear to be people going off-site to make a fuss out of those images being removed or proceeding to spam us with edits of them. Our “ideological stance” in this matter is primarily based around minimizing “trolling” and its effects on the site and its users.
 
 
@Background Pony #3AF5  
As has been said before, if you want the filtering on your account reevaluated, report yourself and someone will look into it. If you’re finding so many images under a particular tag to be meeting your disapproval, it may be time to use a filter to spoiler or hide them, or being using the individual Hide image function.
 
People have been very competent in using the site’s filters to cull out images of fetishes, ships, characters, and even things like anthro or humanized in the past, and this really should be no different.

@Background Pony #FA71  
I imagine he meant he looked at accounts with a large number of downvotes in total; there are a good many users that really love to hit that down arrow button.
 
Currently we’ve only looked at voting patterns on a few specific tags, regardless of past activity on other tags.

@Background Pony #3AF5  
Warning everyone that’s been mass downvoting these images is a waste of time; literally, we don’t have the time, and a large number, if not the majority, of those warned would take it as an incentive to continue.
 
Rules #4 and #6 have been codified for years and we’ve generally only needed to apply the latter when we spot really anomalous voting statistics mostly related to multi-account voting. In this case we took a look at the votes on certain tags and found users downvoting the totality, or near totality of the tags, as well as users with very little site activity other than to downvote (and often post on) those tags.
 
What we’re seeing is a very clear case of a number of people refusing to use the site’s filtering system, refusing to follow the site’s rules, and focusing instead “downvote bombing” a set of images they could wholly hide via their tag filters, or via the individual image hiding feature. We’ve spent years being extremely lenient on enforcing certain site rules, but the aggressive, and mirthful, rule breaking we’re seeing now is forcing our hand.

@Xppp1  
Their numbers are off; that said, I’ve disabled it as it does seem like a false positive.