tsc... now, clap your hands...
Sorry if I am not clap happy for gore.
Garr, keep the violence separate if there is not violence in the picture.
MAKE THEM RAPE EACH OTHER
GIVE THEM A KIND AND LOVING HOME
If we're going to have that rule, maybe it should be posted on an entrance page.
In general, anything that might get spammed with HNNGs on danbooru should be left alone by the abusers. ABUSE AND DRAMA ARE THE MAJORITY OF IMAGES, CAN YOU NOT LEAVE THE FEW CUTE ONES ALONE?
Both audiences should just stick to what they prefer. A disclaimer along the lines of "Please keep violence comments to the violence images, and in the same way please refrain from crusading against the violence if you don't like it". Violent comments on non-violence ruins the experience of the FF crowd. Non-violent comments and anti-abuse on the abusive images ruins the experience of the abusers. Maybe I'll drop shii a line about it later.
That would be a godsend. Surprised it hasn't been done yet.
Thinking about it further, there's a further division. Family friendly- the ultimate, absolutely nothing can go wrong here extremely safe for the kids stuff- should have violence comments avoided on a whole, but there's a good deal of non-violent material that doesn't count. Things like when yukkuris are shitting/pissing everywhere, danger is heavily implied, the yukkuris are being shitheads (e.g. home invasion/puffing up/insulting), or if it's anything by z-aki in general.
Ya. A lot of the stuff looks "family_friendly" until the moonspeak is translated.
I mean seriously, there's enough abuse images that we don't need to go around shouting for death in family_friendly images. We don't want people screaming "YOU FUCKS" in violent images, and we don't want people screaming "KILL THEM" in family_friendly images. It works out better that way.
I don't view puffing up as not being family_friendly.
To me, as long as it doesn't involve outright gross/shithead/clearly typecasted danger or crassness i ngeneral, it should be okay.
Home invasion is iffy, it depends on if its cute or not really, or if danger is clear.
Is there any way to do something similar to danbooru and safebooru? One for violent/abuse images, the other for family-friendly/cute/non-violent/etc images. IT seems like a good way since a lot of people who just want family friendly or cute pictures don't have to wade through all the violent stuff so it may create more traffic for the non-violent if its seperate but equal.
Unfortunately this is a very basic version of the danbooru clone few functionality and plug-ins. Shii is the one that has to add the plug-ins and what you're asking for is essentially a mirror site that selects only family_friendly/cute/etc tags... hard to do when this site is running on ads as is.
Heck, I'd settle for just the note function so us translators can post translations directly on the image as opposed to a comment.
Liking both abuse and family friendly stuff, I'm not sure where the line should go. I always figured if the yukkuri's in pain, it goes in the abuse category.
A pool option for series/themes would be fun. One of these days I might get a pack of Red Bulls and fix some of the older tags to the current formats.
>>Home invasion is iffy, it depends on if its cute or not really, or if danger is clear.
Not iffy at all. People here pretty much hate them most when they're invading homes and like to see them smashed in that context. Personally, I dislike the cute ones the most and want to make them all scream, regardless. In the same way, puffing up makes them even more despicable. Add cuteness and puffing you have the perfect torture mix.
You've still got plenty of full family friendly images removing all those. Of course, non-violence and family friendly aren't the same (for the reasons I've already covered).
Family friendly: The ultra safe, absolutely nothing can go wrong, nothing implied, nobody is hurt or going to get hurt category. Only happy smiles all round. Home invasions definitely do NOT count as family friendly.
I personally disagree with puffing up, it really depends oh how a person reacts. Seeing a cute thing do something michevious makes me go "aww so cute I want to hug it" but I guess we all act differently.
Puffing up is still the cutest thing to me at least.
I don't think family friendly should be so, so strict since it should just be less crass than non-violent.I say PG to PG-13 counts as family_friendly.
A yukkuri puffs up generally when they are trying to attack, insult or intimidate a person. Often accompanied by insults. Still doesn't count as family friendly, generally.
And that's why there's two levels: family_friendly and non_violent. There's a reason why family friendly is strictly tagged. Family_friendly is strictly safe for all the family. Nothing that might be perceived as gross _at all_ and for the people who can't stand remotely anything bad happening to a yukkuri ever.
I still think that it can be defined as being more cute than anything. There isn't the gross value in this
as compared to this
So I don't see how the first isn't family_friendly. Its like when you see a puppy ready to attack, yes it may not be strictly safe, but it isn't something that is going to violate any level of family_friendliness.
>>don't want people screaming "YOU FUCKS" in violent imagesI'm almost ready to call that a quote.>>hard to do when this site is running on ads as isWhile I admit a Safebooru idea is out of the question, it shouldn't be too hard to impliment a tag "blacklist". This would work both ways: overenthusiastic violence-lovers wouldn't feel the need to drop comments like the above in these images if family_friendly stuff simply couldn't be seen.
It's cute, but that's what makes them so smashable. Again, it's not family friendly because it's not strictly safe. Puffing fits more into the danger category (which isn't family friendly).
That works, I just meant some way to keep the two extremes out of close proximity and have a black list for people who don't want violence, i.e, flagging certain types of abuse/words often associated with abuse that can be set easily or something.
and related to what tea said,I think its a matter of opinion of whether or not that makes them smashable. SOmeone who is already predisposed too violence will take it as danger while someone who is looking for something cute, when there is not outright danger/deibu, will not look that way. So I disagree with that idea although I understand the logic behind it.
TL:DR: Violent peeps look at one way, family_friendly/non-abusers look at another way.
SET IT EASY IM A GENIUS HARRR
We kind of separate the images into 2 different category, though the tagging is not ideal when there's only a few of us doing it. Non_violent: puffing up could be nonviolent but not family_friendly, and family_friendly which is kind of self-explanatory.
TLDR: Look for non_violent images when you search.
And in that way, puffing_up belongs into non_violent rather than family_friendly.
puffing up is usually part of crassness.
But there ARE some cute examples.post #405
Usually, but I feel that its case by case.
We've established that puffing up is not family friendly (which is 100% safe- as you said it can be interpreted with danger and violence). They can count as non-violent, though.
I can deal with that.
I thought there was a way to omit tags in search by putting a "-" in front, but no dice. That might help cut down on people seeing what they don't want to see.
I don't think there's a need for blacklists and segregating the images into two sites though. Most the time it's obvious by the thumbnail if an image is abuse or not. And if you guess wrong, it isn't that hard to just look away and close the window.
Its the Internet. If you can't handle occasionally stumbling upon offensive content, walking away and not making a fuss, you're going to have a hard time.
You can actually use a "-" to remove search terms... but it only works if you already have a term in there.
And I agree with Three's sentiment. Segregating and blacklisting material is unnecessary. It can lead to confusion in the long run, and make the problems made by mistagged images even worse (and make efforts to appropriately re-tag everything harder.)
When you see something you don't like, just turn around 360 degrees and walk away. It's far simpler in the long run.
So that's how it works? Thanks.
That's why we need the "no commenting on things you don't like" rule somewhere visible/easy to find. So far all OYP has is a gentleman's agreement which you only know about if you've been here a bit (and probably got yelled at for breaking).
I sent shii an email asking about it, so hopefully it might be solved soon.
OYP= One yukkuri place?
I still believe puffing up is family friendly if there is nothing crass in the picture/violence.
It seems that what I said had a great repercussion, but I think they split into groups, one of them will fall, because there are people who come to the site to see these "sweetheart", and others like me who has been delighted with abuse, but I still look at pictures "normal" and whether the puffing_up I particularly boil with rage when I see this sort, but not because I do not like, it's because I'm crazy about abuse yukkuris, and turn 360 degrees will not quench my thirst for torture...
I said that it depends on the reaction of the person, not anything in the picture itself that lends itself to that interpretation. There is nothing in the picture itself that a person, coming in who is not already -into- abuse, will rage at and if he does going, "Well I think they are ugly" is different than making an abusive comment, at least in my eyes.
I can see that if you don't like it, don't comment, but thats just my fiddy cent.
Unfortunately, pictures are tagged based upon... the actual pictures over anything else, such as your own interpretation.
post #19484 is an example of family friendly in puffing up. I removed the FF tags from post #19486 and post #11807. These are clearly not 100% safe. In the first case, due to the violence that follows, and in the second case, it's clear that the group puffing is a response to a threat (and commonly is based upon other work).
tl:dr: quit trying to classify as much as you can as family friendly, use non-violent instead.
I phrased that pretty badly, actually: That isn't to say tagging also isn't based upon interpretation, but is based primarily on the actual material, and also based upon what happens in other material available (which establishes that puffing up is 90% in response to a threat) and interpretation of that. That said, family friendly is material that cannot have any dangerous or violent interpretation to it.
^ That's exactly it. While it's open to interpretation whether a picture should be family_friendly or not, you should tag the picture as is. You can search non_violent for simple pictures where yukkuris are not getting hurt/killed.
I think not, I see, algums yukkuris puffing_up just because if they feel strong and override their wishes, so that place is abuse, it might be an "incentive" for the artist in the abuse continued...
sorry for "algums" the correct is "some".
An odd correction; what language is it? I don't recognize it...
I believe it to be Portuguese.
Yes it is Portuguese, I'm from Brazil ... perhaps the only Brazilian who has here ... went back and have started to complain about comments Family_friendly abuse, what is going on? as far as I know most visitors come to see abuse, not to see these yukkuris fucking in love stories ... I WANT TO SEE THE MASSACRE!
Tip: Front page says keep your 'Pain gives me the lulz' comments to the violence and abuse images. Just like it says to keep 'Evil haters of yukkuri should die!' comments out of the violence images.
As much as I do sympathise with you Hamatek, and as much as it is true that most of the crowd for family friendly has disappeared, it's just some common decency. Respect goes both ways. There's plenty of happy yukkuris being massacred, so there isn't a shortage of material... stick to those and all will be fine...
but sometimes I am grateful, I think if that site only had images of abuse would be boring, because I for example I look forward to appearing abuse images that impress me, now we stop to think, is that this is not the same as abuse a dog or a cat? but here comes the answer! a dog or a cat puffing up not because you're too busy and that is sure to give attention later, or say the words that I go crazy: you're stupid? wanna die? the image above, for example, they may be cute but I was always angry with cute designs as they appear in pokemon so wanted to crush them like flies and if I had not put that comment there, we would not have this debate.
I have no idea what you just said.
sorry, I do not ... but has to understand something right?
I understood it. :P
But please keep abuse comments away from family_friendly threads. We have too much drama with the 2 factions. If you want to crush them, keep it in your mind.
e que graça teria? só dizer que essas merdas são cutes não serve de nada...é tão difícil entender?
me digam, que graça tem de ficar fazendo histórinhas com final feliz?
ow shit, I wrote wrong again ...
and what fun would it? just say that shit cutes are no good...is so difficult to understand?
tell me, what fun it must be doing stories with happy endings?
No fun at all... to us, BUT to some people stories with violent endings are no fun. As oversensitive as they may be sometimes, those people don't want the suggestion or seeing anything bad happening to yukkuris at all. Everyone has different tastes and things they find fun, and we should consider that.
Hamatek, why arn't you capable of comprehending? These are not suggestions. These are the rules. Use of this website is a privilege, and if you can't follow the rules you may lose the ability to comment on it. Understand easy.
I respect that, but I think a commentary of abuse in family _friendly is not alarming, sometimes you can use to break the ice...
Use it as an icebreaker on the violent pictures, then...
No, that's not an icebreaker. It's the start of another tired, drawn-out argument. The same way if I went to post #19515 and went "You guys are sick. How can you like that???"
Not that we are crazy about abuse is because, in a sense, makes me sick to see these little things with cute faces and how "this" up there told Understand "easy" man, it makes me possessed by the "anger". Now, these were not made yukkuris for abuse? I say first?
I think the same reasons you like family_friendly
Yes, we would like to think they were made for abuse and it seems there are artists who think so too, but there are people who don't.
Hamatek, might want to drop this line while you're ahead (you're not even ahead any more)
Desculpe, Tea, eu não entendi a ultima parte.. o que quer dizer?
"Hamatek, might want to drop this line while you're ahead (you're not even ahead any more)"
Sorry, Tea, I did not understand the last part .. what do you mean?
^Tea recommends you cease this disjointed rambling before you further make a nuisance of yourself.
I'm probably the only person who likes non-abuse stories but I figure even if its a niche, to respect that position, and for me to respect your position to matter what I think of it, is the best way to continue.
It is still my belief that family_friendly should include puffing_up in situations where it is not clearly aggravating/clear danger/clearly designed to incite anger.
Hamatek, I reccomend you just stick to your side of the pond and I'll stick to mine so we don't bother each other.
We've established your beliefs are wrong. It could be said that puffing_up as an action is designed to incite anger from a viewer (and it commonly does).
Alright, then that matter is settled.
Har har, now I has the last word!
...Quit being a retard.
do not worry, I still have a trump card, bunch of sick ...
Dear lord, just drop it already.
ha, ha, ha!
but seriously, what you see in family_friendly?what's so good?
that's what I'm talking about!
Seriously, you are like a South-American rapist. Leave it alone.
man, this is racism...