Happy Holidays: Server Upgrades and Rule Updates

[Nick86]

@Teasday - Well no of course, trolling scans should be removed, i mean in the case of rapeman scans, the translator use some extra pages but only after the regular chapter not in the middle, i think this is the example where you shouldn't remove these pages but suggest to the users who have issues simply block the translator. Only this.

 

[Skrist]

Does the thing about the extra pages count towards groups like squiggles where they add a bunch of images from other sources for no reason and take up like a fourth of the actual chapter's length? Also the times where they were trying to get people to buy them shit.

 

[Nitouryu]

This appears to be a case of an aggregator site growing big, gaining majority support of a scanlation community and starting to act as a Supervisory Body of what scanlators can or can't do with their work.

On paper it's supposed to be very simple:
Profiles, forum posts, comments — property of MD, as they are created on the platform. MD can delete, edit, filter, ban, curate and do whatever they see fit with this content.
Scanlations — 'creation' of scanlators. Only groups can decide what fonts, resolution or dumb credit pages a.k.a. afterword they use.

The moment MD sets down what can or can't be seen in scans they have already crossed slippery slope and slid down. Directly intended or not but your new Rule is attempting to bend the face of the scanlation community into whatever a select group of people will deem to be fit (tow the line or be left out). Unless credits page has something explicitly illegal, this is a non-issue. Actually, this has been a non-issue for 20 years. It must be true that westerner lives are so good and boring that they can't help but invent problems and then work to provide a 'solution'.

Implementing an option to close individual 'toxic' comment sections or auto-blocking group for the sensitive person who reported and found it offensive would solve your issues, but I assume that wouldn't align with the actual goal you have in mind here. That is, instead of controlling readers you want to control groups.

Of course at the end of day what we scanlators do is illegal and what this site does is illegal (spare me the gray zone disclaimer), therefore everyone is free to do whatever they want. It's just disappointing that one entity is trying to flex on the other.

 

[Aryrha]

@Exile Experience meaning a positive one (would I want another type?) versus drowning in incited rage chats when I just want see what other people thought of a chapter or their interpretation or implication of events. Comments already have policies that govern them and now does additional content in uploaded chapters that CAUSES problems. Notice that I said causes problems, because from what I am infer from you, MD is going to burn the credits down with abandon, causing a mass exodus which makes little sense. Credits or comments that cause problems, which are covered by guidelines and affects user experience, action prolly taken, Given the rarity of that ‘additional content’ that could be problematic, why would I object to MD having this tool if it maintains my positive experience. If that ceases to be the case, then I would of course think differently.

 

[gormadoc]

I'm not comfortable with the vagueness of the new credit page rule. "Extraneous political content" means very little in any concrete way, as the far right and especially the far left view any expression in any media as a political statement, even if the political center (as you guys have outed yourselves) don't feel it is. To someone in the center, "My Lesbian Experience with Loneliness" isn't very political, though it is social commentary. To someone on the far right or far left it's unabashedly political. MHA has an anti-classism streak throughout, so is it political or not? Though I think most of his beliefs are wrong, Rapeman's "Yukionna" starts with a dude destroyed by a false sexual assault claim, which is very much a political issue; does that make it political enough for Rapeman to post his credit pages? Since trans identity is a political issue now, are all gender bender mangas political enough? Even the most milquetoast, inoffensive, and mundane material is considered to be political by the far left, simply because it represents the status quo. There's not really any bright line given where somebody can know what is going to get moderated in advance, since you're relying on users understanding your unstated beliefs on what is and isn't political.

I know that the vagueness is partially intentional, as @Plykiya explicitly said as much on page 5 here, but vague rules, even when they get applied in good faith, feel arbitrary when they do get applied. It led to an extremely toxic atmosphere across much of Batoto towards the end, with mods applying rules as they thought they were supposed to be applied and getting massive push-back for it, and a terrible us-vs.-them dichotomy. You don't need to be a power mod for this to look bad. Even in this thread, long after Batoto died, there are still users complaining about the weird fuzziness in the ecchi vs. smut moderation there. Doing this isn't going to make a better community; there's going to be long-term discontent over this.

There are bright lines that could be made; it seems that it's explicitly racist content and the Christchurch stuff that merits the political part of the rule. It's currently hard to tell whether you're making a rule that would justify moderation of stuff that you've already moderated or whether you foresee enforcing the rules more than you had before; there are conflicting statements here: it's been claimed that only that Christchurch page was that bad but also that current content wouldn't be retroactively moderated, which imply different outcomes. Perhaps a better rule could be made to allow moderation of those if it is the first without capturing more benign jokes about SJWs or Trump? If it's the second, that should be made more explicit and not just talking about Christchurch each time the vagueness is brought up.

I'm also not happy with the idea that the credit pages are going to be removed but otherwise the chapters will be left up. It's not scanlator friendly, considering that we already had drama over credit pages and it didn't go over so well.

 

[BestBoy]

@gormadoc I think the simple explanation is, if your credit page has content unrelated to the manga it's open to moderation. For the examples you listed, as long as the credit pages are referencing the politics present in the manga and those topics are important to the manga they're okay.

 

[Exile]

@Aryrha, I dont usually bother with the comment sections because its entirely irrelevant to my experience reading the manga , in fact I started to avoid it because when it comes to harem when shippers show up, its really a negative experience and I dropped a series because of that. Credit pages wont change that fact, that shippers will ruin harem series for me and they will be entirely within the "rules".

Besides you are ignoring something, if someone picked up a series and makes a credit page that is removed my MD, what do you think will happen? If they are going for that effort then MD removing said pages will result in the group go to MD and say for their work not be uploaded at MD, then there is no discussion here at all ... and neither will be chapters because its not as if groups are queuing up to pick up series being actively being worked on just because they arent in MD and all the discussion will happen in Reddit or whatever, nothing changes besides MD moderators not having to deal with the comment sections and the group chapters not being in MD.

Again, MD cannot force groups to change their credit pages but can make groups to reconsider if they want their work uploaded at MD. And the comment section will remain the same, if the series have slavery then cue a bunch of "slavery is wrong" comments, should that be next? That MD is saying *now* that they dont doesnt change that but months ago they said they would not remove credit pages resulting in groups removing their work from MD, *now* they are saying that will remove credit pages if they are "too troublesome" with incredible nebulous rules about what is and what isnt.

 

[gormadoc]

@BestBoy I don't think that's quite it, since then specifying "political" is unnecessary. And defining "important" politics is a dumpster fire waiting to light.

 

[BestBoy]

@gormadoc I was summarizing, but maybe that's not exactly right. An explicit example would be a credit page with references to brexit in a manga with no content remotely related to such an event. As for "important" politics, I meant more that they were important to the through-line of the story or are mentioned often enough to be considered a sticking point for the story. Not that they were important in the grand scheme of things.

Really, the point of these rule changes is to move these discussions to a more appropriate place when they aren't relevant to the manga. Somewhere that isn't disruptive to readers who want to discuss the manga. At least, that's how it seems to me. Perhaps the mods aren't going to go in as hard as I initially thought and credit pages talking about someone's favorite couple from an obscure anime/game are safe. Regardless, I think 99.9% of credit pages are going to be left alone and a handful of folks are fearmongering.

 

[The_Fapper]

"maybe we could set certain groups as hidden the same way we do with moderated comments, so that these groups would need to explicitly allowed to be shown in the settings."

I'd be perfectly happy with that.
It's no different than an age gate or something, and allows the content for people who want it in it's intended form without bothering the hurt feelings brigade.

If you want to see everything, just toggle "view all groups".

 

[deleteTF]

@gormadoc @nitouryu
You guys made very good points, however:

Scanlations — 'creation' of scanlators. Only groups can decide what fonts, resolution or dumb credit pages a.k.a. afterword they use.

The moment MD sets down what can or can't be seen in scans they have already crossed slippery slope and slid down.

An argument could be made that the credits page isn't really part of the scanlation, they aren't in the RAW's of the manga, aren't made by the author, they are added by the scanlations teams, a way to just credit whoever translated it. If you see credit's page that way, which Holo said he does earlier in this thread, then applying the new rule is acceptable, since this non-official thing is driving away discussion about the chapter to another topic entirely. I can see your reasoning here, but for some people the credit's page isn't part of the original manga or official in any way.

Though I think most of his beliefs are wrong, Rapeman's "Yukionna" starts with a dude destroyed by a false sexual assault claim, which is very much a political issue; does that make it political enough for Rapeman to post his credit pages?

Very good arguments you made in your post, regarding this quote, i asked a mod in the thread if a certain manga containing for example a political figure, is it allowed to scanlators to discuss and give an opnion freely about this person (on the credits page), even if the opnion they give, isn't entirely related to the way they are depicted in the manga (for example if a manga depicts Trump and talks about what he said about immigrants, it's still allowed to discuss other things related to trump, that are not talked about in the manga). The mod said YES. I asked later if that extends to other topics like racism and etc. And he said IT DOES.

So if rapeman commented on this that don't break any 5.1 rules, then yes he is allowed to talk about assault claims or whatever.

 

[The_Fapper]

An argument could be made that the credits page isn't really part of the scanlation

I disagree.
Is the credits page a part of the original manga? No.
Is it a part of the scanlation? Absolutely.

The scanlator did the work. He translated the manga, and he decided what should or shouldn't be there.
That is for no-one but themselves to decide. What the reader decides is whether or not they want to read the finished product.
And absolutely, the aggregator has no right whatsoever to determine what is or isn't in a finished scanlation, nor what parts they think should or shouldn't be in it. That is solely the job of the scanlator.

They can only choose whether they want to host the finished product or not. If you remove pages, it is no longer the complete scanlation as intended by the person who has done the work.
You have effectively stolen it from them and changed it without their permission, just as the scanlator is stealing and changing the work of the manga author.
If you choose not to host it, you are then censoring their works. If you try to move it somewhere it will never be seen, you are then censoring their works.
That's fine, as it is the right of the site owner to choose what they will or won't host. It will anger people, but it is still your right to do so.

And it is the right of the site user to see what you have done, and to stop using your site because of it.
You know it's wrong, and that's why you did nothing for so long. It's why you should continue to do nothing.
And nothing will come of it if you do. A comment section will be talking about part of the scanlation they just read. That is all.

By default, the majority must block content they don't like, as only a very small minority of works would require it.
However, the majority is stupid and lazy, so they won't. It makes no difference to me then, if instead by default the minority must reveal the content they do like.
Such a change would be an acceptable outcome, but only if those rules were removed, and scanlators were instead required to mark their content as politically incorrect if it is.

To remove the content is censorship. To hide the content from everyone is censorship. To hide it only from those who wish not to see it, is fair enough.
If you must intentionally choose to go looking for it, you have no right then to complain about it's presence.

 

[deleteTF]

@The_Fapper
I Was talking more about what Holo and mods interprets what scanlations mean than what i believe in, so I agree with your point. What Holo said was this:

1. Policing scanlation - At a casual glance, it may seem like we're policing scanlation, but if you think about what scanlation actually is (taking raws, cleaning, translating, typesetting, etc), clearly adding extra pages is not part of scanlation.

And i would like to know what @Holo has to say about this because The_Fapper has some solid points.

 

[tailor31415]

thanks for the rule update! both seem reasonable and well-thought out to me.

don't know what I expected when I scrolled through the whole reply thread but man, the stupid arguments some people can come up with.

no, the credit page doesn't count as the work of the scanlator in relation to the chapter if it's just a bunch of memes or a rant - that's commentary and an aside, save it for a forum thread. if it's historical notes and footnotes, such as the Golden Kamuy note pages, then that is the scanlator's work in relation to the chapter. come on, be reasonable.

 

[deleteTF]

@tailor31415
Some credits page are part of the scanlation and some are not? You see what are you saying here? By classifing credits page you are policing scanlations, because some mod would have to decide if it's appropriate or not.

Or all credits pages are part of scanlation or none are. The mods have already said they don't want to police scanlations, that's why this discussion exists, because some people think this new rule polices scanlations.

 

[Pendragon_Alexander]

Maybe, rather than those "problematics" pages removed by mods, could you categorize scanlation pages(ex. chapter pages, credit pages, extra pages) then reader could choose which page to be loaded.

ps: sorry for my bad english

 

[Exile]

I say it again.

Months ago a group decided to make fun of some groups credit pages, those groups taken offense and asked for that credit page to be removed, at the time MD said they would not remove the page since that would be policing scanlation groups, as a result many groups decided to remove their work in MD.

Now MD wants to remove pages that are "problematic" because apparently some people on the comment section do not like their contents, this is pretty much the exact same situation of months ago except now MD wants to make a policy of removing "problematic" content from chapter uploads, the fact is credit pages are part of the chapter upload since groups made explicit clear they are (this is in relation to certain aggregator sites that removed said pages) so no matter how you want to cut it, by removing the credit pages its removing part of the group work.

As another point.

Nothing stops the group from putting such "problematic content" on the chapter proper itself, its not as if "translator notes" dont exist, then what? The problem I have with this whole thing is the following ... it will piss groups off again and it will come across as hypocrite since months ago MD refused to do this when asked, now they are because moderators want to deal with the comment section becoming too rowdy, if the group knows full well the readers response and ignores it ... what you think will happen when MD actively removes part of their work as "problematic"?

If MD claims they dont want to interfere with Scanlator Groups then they cannot start telling then what they should or should not put on their chapter releases as long they are proper because they will not like that, if readers have a issue ... stop reading their releases then, because groups will not change how they work because of what the readers think especially in the case they go the trouble of making such credit pages, they know very well what they are doing.

I am sick and tired of having kindergarten teachers telling me what I should be reading or not, I read (I would not call reading it, I kinda seen what it was going just by looking at it and only reading the starting part) that credit page and made a comment that the translation was bad more or less ... when the next chapter come out and it was more of the same, I simply blocked the group. If the comment section became such a problem then either disable comments because people are incapable of not taking the bait or just block the uploads since the group is clearly trolling, things should be handled at a individual level and not with a blanket nebulous ruling over what is acceptable as credit pages or not just so easily baited dont get their feathers rustled and the kindergarten moderators have to go in and do their jobs.

 

[WakasagiIsTheBest]

Merry Christmas.

 

[sterven]

It just occurred to me that despite all my bitching I still haven't wished you all a merry Christmas, so MERRY CHRISTMAS everyone I just hope my New Years isn't as rowdy as this one.

 

[neorasp]

happy holidays
is one of the updates to the site a "new title" feature/page?