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

Princess Luna

Senior Moderator

Site Developer

Tag Czar

@doloresbridge
The 4th image was >>2337074 (deleted); what image are you talking about that has Hitler’s face in it?
As for the new set of images, I’d consider all 3 Rule 3, although since they’re not political/controversial in nature, we might leave them be (unlike if they were used for something like stalinism, not great to have lying around).

@CHurricane
Germans, as in the nationality, often get slandered in this manner, and so it’s a bit of a problem, even if some might find it funny.
The Auschwitz gate I’d say mainly is a problem because it’s referring to a concentration camp, and so it very much seems like it’s saying that the ponies are going to be murdered for mingling with other cultures. It’s certainly not the worst image of the bunch, and a potential case to reeavulate.
While the Titanic thing wasn’t low-effort, it really did seem all geared towards the message, and when the message is “lol your site is dead”, that’s a bit in the realm of bait. As for the OC owner, no they can’t take down any image of their OC that they want (even ones where she’s hanging out with ponies the OC owner doesn’t like); the trouble is in this case, the OC is very prominent and staring at the viewer, which suggests the viewer should make a connection between her and Ponybooru.
I suppose I can add IDs; previously, there wasn’t much of a point to doing so, but now, tags will show on deleteds, so it may help explain to people what was going on.

@Background Pony #AC58
The bulletpoint at issue is actually this one, with bolding on the important bit:

Do not harass others or try to incite violence against them. Harassment can include namecalling, slanderous speech, or other forms of abusive language.

Abuse images are fine in general, the trouble is when OCs start to represent real people or groups and are shown severely harmed, especially in regards to cultural ideas of committing such violence.

Posted 3 years ago Report
Edited 3 years ago

Link Quote Reply

CHurricane

Devil's Advocate

@CHurricane

I’m not saying that is why the images were deleted, but it seems that you are talking about interpretation and application of rules, and how the rules as worded don’t support the actions that you see.

From my perspective it indeed seems that there is a big amount of interpretation in ruling on some of the pictures and that because of that some pictures get harsher treatment than others.

How would you feel if instead we simply said that we chose to not host those images?

Did this all work better for you when we simply said that nazi-themed images were forbidden?

I generally like people being honest with me so yes i would like it more if you said that you just dont want those pictures rather than making some weird interpretation gymnastic to try to come up with reasoning why particular pieces does/does not break the rules.

I also think right now that the blanked ban on nazi pictures and other things that staff does not agree with would make situation more clear to everyone: users and artists would know that they have to post/look at some pictures on other sites and staff members would not have to waste so much time with debating certain pictures and arguingtheir their deletion/preservation with users, with blanked ban on nazis and other “hatefull things” you might also regain some of the “anti-nazi” artist that filed dnp because you “still alow nazis on the site”

I personally hoped that the new rules would be targeting only the most vile things like unironic and obvious calls to do harm to real people, unironic and obvious promotion of totalitarian ideologies( with no exeptions ) and unironic and obvious disinformation that can cause harm(like anti- vaxers propaganda) but instead it seems to me that you focus on less obvious “questionable” stuff that is often comedic(not serious) in nature and i think that deletions of those pictures should be simillar in nature as sentencing real people to prison(you sentence/delete them only when there is an unquestionable proof of them being guilty/breaking the rules and not because it seems to you that they might be guilty/breaking the rules) . Of course i am not saying that all pictures that were deleted in the past month or two should stay, some of them(like Aryanne with a gun and a murdered Antifa protester partially visible) were clearly crosing the line and i fully agre with their deletion.

Posted 3 years ago Report
Edited 3 years ago

Link Quote Reply

Northern

I refuse to bend

often get slandered in this manner, and so it’s a bit of a problem, even if some might find it funny.

So you admit that even though it’s a joke that isn’t even racist, but at the expense of a nation, it’s banned because it’s offensive? Yeah? Do you have any idea what applying this evenly will do, especially with the already present fictional racism established rule? There will be no allowing any image that jokingly parodies ponies as Communists, Nazis, or any other politically motivated faction that is commonly associated with a nation and could offend people of that nationality… That’s a VERY dangerous reasoning to add to the list.

Posted 3 years ago Report

Link Quote Reply

Derpy Whooves

Looking For My Doctor

My question is: how did it seem to be doing this? … How was this ruled to be bait based on the context of the picture?

This is a great example of how discussing things like this publicly can become a real problem. There’s confidentiality involved, plus given that there is an angry mob buzzing around this thread and sharing screenshots of every single comment it would be better if the angry mob were fixated on staff rather than random artists or members of the community who want nothing to do with any of this. Maybe there are better fits for rules under which it could have arguably have been deleted, and perhaps ‘bait’ shouldn’t have been in the deletion reason. But the important thing is that it is not an image that we wish to host because of the reasons that Princess Luna stated.

Posted 3 years ago Report

Link Quote Reply

CHurricane

Devil's Advocate

@Princess Luna

I still think that there is a lot of interpretation in some of those decisions and i dont really agree with them but i have to admit that there is an argument to be made(even if a really small one) with the reasoning you provided.

…It’s certainly not the worst image of the bunch, and a potential case to reeavulate.

I thought that the deleted pictures that are listed by you in this thread are to be considered deleted permanently. So are they not? And if they will be evaluated again in the future then in what time period would that “future” be? Also are all images deleted and listed in this thread being considered for potentioa reevaluation or only few?

Overall i will still look closely at the future deletions and i hope that i will have less problems with the ones that will be chosen to deletion.

Also i hope that you(staff) will make decision on the nyx picture in the nearby future i would like to hear the reasoning behind the decision.(no mater which) would you be able to provide me with estimated time when i can expect your decision in this matter?

And i am afraid that this will be the last post from me for a couple of hours because i need to get some sleep so i am sorry but i will be unable to respond to you for some time.

Posted 3 years ago Report

Link Quote Reply

Background Pony #F565

@Derpy Whooves
So the of creator being offended when his oc is near an oc he finds objectional is grounds for deletion? Are you sure the artist’s intent is to piss of the oc creator with how popular the oc is?

Posted 3 years ago Report

Link Quote Reply

Background Pony #F565

@Derpy Whooves
Does that also mean oc creators have final say on artwork of others when it includes their oc?

Posted 3 years ago Report

Link Quote Reply

Derpy Whooves

Looking For My Doctor

@CHurricane
I pretty much agree. For me, I really feel that things like the September Rule #5 change are preferable. Given that this site is so similar to a fan-run convention, having rules that are cut-and-dried and easy to process really helps prevent burnout and helps keep staff from having to spend all their time dealing with legalistic debates over images in the gallery. Every day we have to spend another hour studying any set of images in great detail for ANY reason - ‘is this hyper or just huge?’, ‘is this really vore?’, ‘should we host images of Filly Funtasia?’ - it all contributes to burnout.

I don’t think any of us volunteered for this site with the expectation that we would have to spend time - sometimes hours - every single day for weeks on end - talking about whether or not a particular image which may or may not be bigoted or racist or hate speech is offensive or hurtful. I honestly never expected to see a swastika or have to talk about whether gas chamber jokes or jokes about ‘killing kikes’ were ‘too offensive’ even once, but here we are. And I sure would like that to stop. So like the “Foalcon + Anthro = Rule #5” change, it would be nice if we had a very simple approach to this set of rules, too.

Like - we have a kind of rule on staff. If you don’t want to look at rape images, you don’t have to look at rape images. But now if you don’t want to spend time every single day either arguing about whether Nazi-themed images are ok or not or sitting in a moderation chat where everyone else is doing that, you basically have to leave the team.

And I’d like to get back to a point where if people don’t want to deal with Nazi-themed images or discussions whenever they are here they could still be on staff without having to mute the mod-chat.

i think that deletions of those pictures should be simillar in nature as sentencing real people to prison

Well, that process includes adversarial trials. This is a My Little Pony fan site that is run for a large part by people who have to deal with legal shit all day and really would rather not have to deal with that as a part of our hobby. Again - using the fan-run convention analogy, no one wants to go to a MLP fan convention and spend the weekend doing exactly what they have to do every day at work, or spend the whole weekend debating the rules of the convention. They go there to have fun, share their joy of MLP, and even if people volunteer to help the convention there’s no expectation they’ll spend their whole weekend debating whether a costume breaks a rule or not.

But, as far as your example is concerned, I disagree - and I’ll use the example of memes to describe why.

We often get a lot of almost identical images that are all a part of one meme that people create as the meme evolves and grows and then finally settles into its final form. Whether it’s forced or not, there might be 20 or 100 images or even more (god, sometimes so many more) that all effectively are the same image with slight variations, but folks are trying to create the ‘one meme to rule them all’ and you end up with a lot of people who are just throwing stuff at the wall to see what sticks, hoping their version will be the one meme in the end to rule them all.

It’s like when people upload every freaking frame from a scene on the show. We don’t NEED every freaking frame from scenes in the show. If Starlight Glimmer raises her hoof one tick, is that really worth saving as a separate image? Woof, so many not sure if we should host this or not debates over a hoof moving one frame.

So we delete most of those, and try to keep the ones that are most representative of the meme, or the scene.

None of those deleted images fit the criteria you’re talking about - they’re just so numerous we get rid of most of them so the ones that are the best are saved as a part of the snapshot of that meme.

All those other images didn’t necessarily break a rule, and few of them received a full adversarial trial - it’s like what GlaDOS says about Companion Cubes: They do have feelings, but we just have so many of them (drops Companion Cube into a fire).

But, for the most part, where Nazi-themed images are concerned I think we are deleting images that clearly cross a line. This site does not have a “no Nazis” rule any more. So images aren’t being deleted just because there’s a swastika or a specific OC on them or because they are Nazi-themed. We’re looking at them and asking if they are racist or slanderous or obviously intended to troll or something like that.

And, as I mentioned before, one of the problems of explaining why every single image in a set is deleted or not can involve information that we really can’t make public. Like, if an artist asks us to delete one of their images, but they don’t want it publicly known that they asked for it to be deleted … wot do? If we say “Artist takedown” then the artist gets harassed. If we say “Rule #0” then we get harassed.

I am not saying that any of the images being discussed are represented by that hypothetical. But, it’s better if people harass us, rather than artists, don’t you agree?

I might have gotten off track … going to go replay some more Portal.

Posted 3 years ago Report
Edited 3 years ago

Link Quote Reply

Derpy Whooves

Looking For My Doctor

@Background Pony #F565
Not necessarily.

@Background Pony #F565
Generally speaking, no.

Posted 3 years ago Report

Link Quote Reply

doloresbridge

Peace to all

mob buzzing around this thread and sharing screenshots of every single comment it would be better if the angry mob were fixated on staff rather than random artists or members of the community who want nothing to do with any of this.

I certainly don’t want anyone targeted unfairly, staff or otherwise, but…

Maybe there are better fits for rules under which it could have arguably have been deleted, and perhaps ‘bait’ shouldn’t have been in the deletion reason. But the important thing is that it is not an image that we wish to host because of the reasons that Princess Luna stated.

It was however still an arbitary deletion. One that was done because an artist was upset but there was no rule in place to delete it. As I already pointed out:
@doloresbridge

Not much. Like, creating an OC doesn’t give someone copyright to images with that OC, but if someone has an OC that is plausible their ‘ponysonna’ then images created that are arguably personal attacks on that OC can be seen as possible Rule #0, but that’s rare. That’s in general though — I don’t know what part that may or may not have played in this deletion.

And what was mentioned here in the site’s takedown policy

Derivative works (that is, works that are non-transformative in a copyright sense) are of course still protected under copyright law; in this case an original characters’ creator may file a takedown request. For instance, original artworks that feature an original character are generally transformative and so stand alone; very basic edits, on the other hand, are generally derivative.

Considering Milky Way is a meme character that is widely used in a variety of contexts and hasn’t been strictly claimed by the owner. How was this ruled to be bait based on the context of the picture?

The site explicitly has a principle that appears to be in place that is meant to defend against someone, say Penstroke, suddenly demanding all things referencing/featuring Nyx be taken down. Why is that in place? Because, such a meme character is everywhere! From shitposts >>2409043 >>361927 >>1925114 that could be upsetting to the creator to various artworks >>2405259 >>2278498 >>2402416
You can’t control a meme and when an OC like this spreads and is used for many years it would cut off a lot of output to suddenly say: “the creator doesn’t like it, we can’t host it anymore!” Now, though, you have carved out a singular exception without a justification and in violation of that framework. This is the type of thing that causes you to lose trust and credibility. The questions that comes to ones mind are that: “will there be others who demand veto power over meme characters like this?” You did one carve out and I’m not sure you’ll have the ability to resist doing another after doing one and if you do it is the exact type of special exception that you claim are not being made because the staff uses pre established rules and a jury system.

Posted 3 years ago Report
Edited 3 years ago because: typo

Link Quote Reply

Background Pony #F565

@Derpy Whooves
Then how does >>2421475 (deleted) constitute as baiting the oc creator, and why was that used as a reason to remove it?

Posted 3 years ago Report

Link Quote Reply

Derpy Whooves

Looking For My Doctor

The site explicitly has a principle that appears to be in place that is meant to defend against someone, say Penstroke, suddenly demanding all things referencing/featuring Nyx be taken down. Why is that in place?

Because artists retain their rights.

Now, though, you have cared out a singular exception without a justification and in violation of that framework.

Yeah. But it’s not singular. Anyway, not everything fits in the rules, and even when things fit in the rules, they (including our Takedown Requests guidelines) work together in a flexible grid of interoperability. This is an art site, and artists push boundaries and look at things in unexpected ways, so it’s not surprising that we keep finding our selves dealing with unusual situations and edge cases.

I’m not sure you’ll have the ability to resist doing another after doing one

There have been other instances where we’ve taken down art that used other people’s OCs in ways the person who created the OC or whom the OC was a ‘ponysonna’ of objected to. There will undoubtedly be instances in the future. But the instances where this happened in the past didn’t result in any of the things you’re worried about, so that should be reassuring.

the exact type of special exception that you claim are not being made because the staff uses pre established rules and a jury system

I never claimed that there aren’t exceptions or that things like this aren’t being done. Of course we’re doing things like this. Stuff like this isn’t really encapsulated in the rules - it’s more a practice. Like I’ve said, the rules can’t capture everything that’s going on with a fan run art site like this, nor should they be expected to.

PS: heh heh - I love this image ^__^

Posted 3 years ago Report
Edited 3 years ago because: because ps

Link Quote Reply

Derpy Whooves

Looking For My Doctor

@Background Pony #F565
Your question has already been answered by an administrator. Please refer to their answer.

Posted 3 years ago Report

Link Quote Reply

Derwol

@Derpy Whooves
That wasn’t an answer. “Shes looking forward therefore its bad” is not an answer anybody will accept or be happy with. That’s insane reaching and mental gymnastics.

Posted 3 years ago Report

Link Quote Reply

Derpy Whooves

Looking For My Doctor

“Shes looking forward therefore its bad”

I thought the question was about the Titanic image. What image was deleted because “Shes looking forward therefore its bad”?

Posted 3 years ago Report

Link Quote Reply

CHurricane

Devil's Advocate

>>2421741 (deleted) got deleted “Rule #0: Bait”
I mean i get it that based on interpretation of unedited originall picture in this thread we can asume that aryanne is “dabbing unironically”(i disagrre with this interpretation) which sends a message that she is happy that derpibooru is dieing/getting killed but i think that because derpibooru is not a person but a website then having that kind of sentiment should be be an acceptable thing to have and picture should stay(at lest for the overall artistic merit because original is most likely not comming back so haveing some version of that pic here would be nice)

So again can i get a reason why it got deleted?

Posted 3 years ago Report

Link Quote Reply

Derpy Whooves

Looking For My Doctor

@CHurricane
I wasn’t involved in the deletion, but it’s another variation on ‘holocaust gas chamber’. I don’t understand the need to go into mental gymnastics about dabbing or not dabbing, if I had been involved in the vote, I would have voted ‘Delete’ just because of the ‘holocaust gas chamber’.

Posted 3 years ago Report

Link Quote Reply

doloresbridge

Peace to all

@Derpy Whooves
We went from you saying that artist with a meme OC don’t have much power over these images…
@Derpy Whooves

@doloresbridge

What power do creators of OC that have become iconic and widely used elsewhere for their works I wonder

Not much. Like, creating an OC doesn’t give someone copyright to images with that OC, but if someone has an OC that is plausible their ‘ponysonna’ then images created that are arguably personal attacks on that OC can be seen as possible Rule #0, but that’s rare. That’s in general though — I don’t know what part that may or may not have played in this deletion.

To saying that artist retain their rights over said images.

Because artists retain their rights.

Listen, I’m not going to accuse you of outright lying but saying “not much”, than jumping around and saying “because artist retain their rights” have too very broad and different implications here.

This is an art site, and artists push boundaries and look at things in unexpected ways, so it’s not surprising that we keep finding our selves dealing with unusual situations and edge cases.

How was this either of those things? She is a longstanding symbol of /mlp/. Been used for years >>959817 in a line up all of /mlp/ other edgy and odd stuff including with the nazi horse oc in question >>1808367 (deleted) >>1141312 >>889809 and has a lot of historic context with the board, ironically, as something that many consider to be unfairly censored >>1433401 So, I do wonder where the line between “not much” and “artist retaining their rights” with all of this here.

But the instances where this happened in the past didn’t result in any of the things you’re worried about, so that should be reassuring.

I am really curious if it has ever happened to a meme OC on this scale. In which case we are in unknown waters.

Like I’ve said, the rules can’t capture everything that’s going on with a fan run art site like this, nor should they be expected to.

No, but I think it would be better to say when you are creating such special exceptions to these rules over dancing around the justifications for it. It would have been better to say that saying it was “bait” when it clearly wasn’t. Otherwise you will loose more trust on all sides of this issue by governing that way.

heh heh — I love this image ^__

In all of this, if that image brought ya a small smile, than I’m glad to be able to end this post on a more positive note.

/)

Posted 3 years ago Report

Link Quote Reply

CHurricane

Devil's Advocate

@Derpy Whooves

“Gas chamber” i can agree with.
“holocaust gas chamber” i can’t agree with, there is no proof in that picture that it is specyfically a Holocaust gas chamber rather than a “normal” one.

I don’t understand the need to go into mental gymnastics about dabbing or not dabbing

Well the argument that they might dab unironicaly threfore they support it was made by princess luna earlier in this thread so i thought i will bring it out.

Posted 3 years ago Report

Link Quote Reply

Derpy Whooves

Looking For My Doctor

Listen, I’m not going to accuse you of outright lying

How kind of you.

but saying “not much”, than jumping around and saying “because artist retain their rights” have too very broad and different implications here

Artist retain their rights. That’s what our whole DNP and takedown process is built around. We periodically touch the edge of the legal system when DMCA takedowns occur, and we want to remain compliant with the whole copyright thing. But an artist retaining their rights does not force us to host their images.

And OCs can’t be copyrighted. They can be trademarked or salesmarked, but instances of that is very rare, and generally speaking an OC owner gets shown the takedown requests guidelines if they ask us to delete something with their OC in it.

Sometimes there are mitigating circumstances or the image otherwise breaks a rule, and then the OC in an image can lead to a process that results in the image being deleted. Rarely, but it does happen.

How was this either of those things? She is a longstanding symbol of /mlp/.

If /mlp/ has a registered trademark they should present it. But just because no one has ever complained about something doesn’t mean they must forever hold their peace, or that they have to accept every single future image without objection.

Been used for years … in a line up all of /mlp/ other edgy and odd stuff

I’m not aware that any of those images have been reported or break any of our rules. I don’t intend to review those images. If you think they are rule breaking please report them, but I don’t see how they are a part of this discussion - they weren’t reported, they haven’t been taken down, they are not under consideration.

I am really curious if it has ever happened to a meme OC on this scale.

It has, but very rarely. And it’s not unusual for these rare exceptions to involve very popular ‘meme’ artists and very popular ‘meme’ OCs. “Paper Stars” is an example - if you were here or on /mlp/ when that happened you almost certainly heard about it. But that’s not apropos this discussion other than as an example of another instance of an OC being the spark that lead to a takedown of an image.

No, but I think it would be better to say when you are creating such special exceptions to these rules over dancing around the justifications for it.

I do not believe that I am ‘dancing’ around anything.

I never claimed that there aren’t exceptions or that things like this aren’t being done. Of course we’re doing things like this. Stuff like this isn’t really encapsulated in the rules — it’s more a practice. Like I’ve said, the rules can’t capture everything that’s going on with a fan run art site like this, nor should they be expected to.

Artists retain their rights, and it’s rare that an image will be deleted because the OC owner objected to the image. That’s not a lie. It’s not dancing around anything.

@CHurricane
If you have a Nazi pressing the ‘go’ button on a gas chamber, how is that not a holocaust reference?

Posted 3 years ago Report

Link Quote Reply

Princess Luna

Senior Moderator

Site Developer

Tag Czar

@CHurricane
It was a (rather lazy) edit to say Derpi was dying, using a controversial base image, to provoke further drama. Pretty clearly bait territory.

Also, I would like to state clearly in relation to arguments going on that I believe there are structural issues with doing posts in the form of interleaving small quoted sections and responses; it worsens the discussion by making it harder to find what is actually being said, and encouraging an inflation of things over time.

Posted 3 years ago Report
Edited 3 years ago

Link Quote Reply

Derpy Whooves

Looking For My Doctor

@Princess Luna
I agree with that concern. I don’t know if my trying to answer questions here is really helpful, given the replies, so I’ll unsubscribe. Besides, talking about takedowns and copyright is not the point of this thread.

Posted 3 years ago Report
Edited 3 years ago

Link Quote Reply

CHurricane

Devil's Advocate

@Princess Luna

Given the fact that originall was deleted partially because of gryphon being gassed which implied racial undertone then editing that element of the picture to make it ideologicaly motivated towards not a living thing(website) and therefore make it more compliant with site rules should not be in my opinion be considered a low quality edit(especially given the fact that originall is currently gone)

And i would also like to ask how much derpibooru logo constributes to the picture being considered a “bait”? Would changing the logo to for example google logo make the picture ok? Or if not then would simply leaving the window space white/black be less of a bait?

Also, I would like to state clearly in relation to arguments going on that I believe there are structural issues with doing posts in the form of interleaving small quoted sections and responses; it worsens the discussion by making it harder to find what is actually being said, and encouraging an inflation of things over time.

It is in my opinion usefull because this form allows adressing specyfic points(like i am doing right now) which is especially usefull when responding to bigger or more complex posts filled with diferent arguments that can be similar to each other. And although it can be used in theory to cherry pick some words, in my opinion as long as the post that quotes the other also contains the link to the quoted post then there should not be a problem because full post can be navigated to with no problem to quickly check for context.

Posted 3 years ago Report
Edited 3 years ago

Link Quote Reply

Princess Luna

Senior Moderator

Site Developer

Tag Czar

@CHurricane
The edit took the image from supporting discrimination to just being inflammatory. A Google logo would be better, but I think still rulebreaking as bait, as with just about any real life target you put in there.
If I had to minimally edit it to comply with the rule, personally, my approach would be to get rid of the Nazism implications by changing Aryanne to Dash and removing the labeling of “gas control”. It would then seem to be about Dash’s beef with Gilda, rather than anything racial, and also wouldn’t seem like it was trying to start arguments by bringing up real-world issues.
As for point-by-points, I used to use them a long time ago, but I found that arguments tended to unravel like novels because points would branch into ever-larger collections while any attempt to coalesce things (addressing multiple points with one) was disincentivized.

Posted 3 years ago Report

Link Quote Reply

Background Pony #0CFF

@Princess Luna

@Derpy Whooves
~~How does quoting part of a post before proceeding to argue against that part make it less clear?~~
That people get sidetracked instead of resolving the arguments is no fault of the system.

I also asked a specific question after being prompted to that was ignored / missed in the ensuing text walls, that i’d like to know derpy’s opinion on.
https://derpibooru.org/forums/meta/topics/explanation-of-update-to-rule-0-for-consistency-and-clarity-especially-in-regards-to-racism?post_id=4905901#post_4905901

Posted 3 years ago Report
Edited 3 years ago

Link Quote Reply

Interested in advertising on Derpibooru? Click here for information!

Pony Arts & Prints!

Help fund the $15 daily operational cost of Derpibooru - support us financially!

This topic has been locked to new posts from non-moderators.

Locked 3 years ago

Lock reason: Thread has devolved well away from useful information and discussion