Your comments

Hey all!

This one's getting a lot of votes, and I have some questions for you all before we consider adding this to the todo list:

1) There's a number of 'abuse' use cases which are cause for concern to me, with the ability to change out a submission file after it's live. The first is simple abuse: upload a great image that people like and favorite/promote heavily, then swap it out for something substantially different and - say - obscene or offensive, but technically within the Acceptable Upload Policy. A bunch of users would potentially have something undesirable in their feed - and indeed, some of those users (if they were <18, and thus not able to view mature and explicit content) might not be able to delete or unfave it if the content rating changed after they fave it.

There's a lot of technical 'edge cases' with allowing submissions to be changed out, that could result in undesirable things. Many of these could likely be solved by policy - but does that mean we'll have to also build an admin interface so staff can see every iteration of the image that's ever been present for that submission?

2) One of the use cases mentioned here has been uploading an updated picture, without disturbing the order of images in a gallery. One feature we're implementing soon is the ability to reorder submissions in your gallery (by moving them to draft, and then 'publishing' them again in the order you want - with the ability to turn off notifications to your users). This admittedly is a slightly clunky workaround to a bigger issue - and wouldn't be as elegant as being able to change out the submission file mid-flight.

3) Another reason given for wanting to change the submission is to "change it out for a higher resolution one". Given that on other sites the fact that changed submission files were not resized was actually a bug, and that changing the submission on Furry Network would not result in any quality increase in the file users get to see (download button excluded from this) - I'm not sure if that's a valid use case?

I'd like some more information from everyone as to why you'd like this feature, so I can be sure that we're judging it based on its merits and solving the actual problem!

Putting as "Under Review" for now, so we can gather more information :3

Hey all -

A LOT of support for this in a short amount of time, wow! This wasn't something we'd thought of - so thanks for suggesting it (and voting for it)!

If we were to add a "Crafts" content type, which functioned identically to Photos, would that cover the majority of use cases? Or, once we add it, would we be recieving calls for another kind of media to be represented?

I agree that Artwork and Photos are mostly a non-technical distinction (ie, they're handled in much the same way, there's no real difference in file type for each) - but what other content types would be needed, if we were to 'do this properly'?

Of course, crafts covers a very wide swathe of content types - I'd almost say that Photography and Artwork would be a subset of "Crafts", to use a purist's viewpoint - but clearly a sensible distinction would be constructive.

What would the concequences of this be, on a wider scale?

This is a technically difficult problem - though we do have some changes in the works that should make it a little less necessary.

For example, the import tool is no longer going to spam 'what's new' when someone you follow imports a bunch of stuff - which should help clear this up a lot. In addition, we're looking to make it optional for users to 'notify' their followers when they publish something - again, which should help with spam.

Closing for now - as hopefully the import changes will fix this for the most part!

We kind of do this already - with "Community Tags". With that, anyone can suggest tags for a given image. Future improvements on the list include the ability for artists to 'approve' or 'make official' community tags (which adds them officially to the list), and to do stuff like remove suggested community tags, flag them as abusive, etc.

I think this is more about the nature of the support site, and what it's good or bad for. It's good for technical discussion of the site and improvements to it, but it's really not very good at all for discussion that involves "sides" at all.

It might be a good idea to use a different approach for things that are controversial, that excludes the idea of voting in a particular direction based on anything other than technical merit for "solving the problem" - like policy decisions.

Going to mark this one as "Completed" for now - but this is a good point.


Yep - there is. It's the section titled "Abuse of site tools" in the Code of Conduct:

This means we can take administrative action against users who abuse the site tools (eg, the 'community tags' tool) to suggest inappropriate tags or harass other users.

Depending on how prevalent the issue becomes, it might be necessary to implement some kinds of requirements to be able to suggest tags via that method - but I think that's best tackled when we encounter the issue first hand.

Good suggestions on how we could do this though!

Thanks for your feedback!

For 3, I recommend voting / contributing here:

Is this more a general criticism of the site's way of displaying images, or just the user profile page?

We have a voting thread for doing it site-wide here:

Good feedback on all of these. Thanks!