Vetting for flagged submissions

I like how reporting submissions for policy violations is so easy. I've been on other furry sites where opening a trouble ticket and getting someone to actually look at it is like pulling teeth. However, I think Furry Network's system goes a little too far in the opposite direction.

I'm not keen on the idea that flagging a submission automatically sends a ticket to the user who uploaded it; that, to me, just seems far too easy to abuse. For instance, I had a piece that was flagged for needing to be marked as "adult" - now, in my mind, the piece in question was not adult in nature; the upload process describes adult art as "nudity, sexually explicit, or suggestive," and this piece was none of those three things. There are plenty of examples of this - vore or babyfur, for instance; both of those genres can have art that isn't remotely sex-related or gory (the two general prerequisites for pieces to be marked "adult"). The exact nature, whether it WAS mature or not, etc. can be debated, but that's not the larger point here. The main point is that I received a ticket literally within seconds of uploading the submission.

If you're trying to build a "welcoming and open" community, it's not a good start to make it easy for users who don't know how to use the tag filtering system to just flag submissions willy-nilly because they don't like what they see. And I realize that no flag is acted upon until it is reviewed by moderators, but sending tickets straight to users is kind of the opposite extreme. It opens the door to superfluous flags by the bucketload. A more sensible way to do it would be that flagged submissions go to moderators first. If the moderators decide that the flag is potentially actionable, then it should go to the flagged user, who should be given an opportunity to take action or dispute the flag.