Feature suggestions and discussion [READ THE FIRST POST]

@saturnstar14  
You also have to look at it this way: Why should uploaders get special privileges? (Apart from editing the description, someone has to do that, after all…) Just because they were 5 minutes faster to upload a picture than another random person?
 
Everyone can be an uploader. Artists, fans of artists, people just randomly browsing the net and seeing a cool picture or even automated bots. (I’m not aware of any upload bots, but it probably is possible.)  
Some care about the comments on their uploaded pictures, some don’t, some are just plain old trolls looking to cause trouble, some actively choose to upload anonymously and often don’t want to interact with the comments and some are too lazy to make an account and couldn’t even track comments on their uploads if they wanted…  
Why should they be allowed to view comments regular users can’t see?
 
Speaking of anonymous uploads and uploads without accounts: Who would even get the power there?  
And there’d also be problems when images get merged. Does the uploader of the the old picture lose their power? Do they keep it and can still see those comments, even though the picture’s uploader officially is someone else now? Does the new uploader get the power to view the comments made on the old picture? Way too much trouble…

@Yoshimon1  
Yeah but maybe the uploader BIS the original artist and they want some extra feedback. Feedback they won’t get on DA because people won’t be honest over there and here they can be because they’re hiding behind a BG pony. But if that anon or someone else says anything remotely against the rules in that comment it gets deleted.  
It would just be nice to look at deleted comments, even without the ability to reply to them. It won’t hurt anyone if you can just look them in.

@saturnstar14  
If it’s actual useful feedback, we tend not to delete those comments, even if they’re a bit harsh.
 
The comments on >>1420925 were just some angry person who kept hurling insults because of recent drama. I know it looks like it was two different anons, but they were the same person. That guy actually has a history of insulting artists, sockpuppeting, etc. And I noticed this morning that out of some 1600 downvotes he had, 90% of them were from six artists. He downvoted almost every image you drew, almost every image three other artists drew, and then about a third each of two other artists’ images. So now he’s permabanned, and all his votes got wiped and deleted.

@Joey  
I see. It’s just that I have a curiosity when it comes to comments on my stuff, even if they’re plain hate.

@LightningBolt  
Using id:x as a filter was not practical when that list was written. I’m not sure if that was a MongoDB thing, or just something that wasn’t programmed into Elasticsearch at the point.
 
Filtering “my:downvotes” as a means of “hide whatever I want” would be considered mass indiscriminate downvoting. If they’re using it to hide things they downvoted for legitimate reasons, that’s one thing, but if they are just spamming downvotes all over the place and indiscriminately downvoting, it’ll be handled like any other case of downvote abuse. The idea of it is to hide stuff you already downvoted, not a means of hiding whatever.
 
@Mad Black  
A little bit easier said that done, as not everyone has a personal filter. A lot of people use “system” filters (everything, default, max spoilers, etc), or shared filters. Having a button to auto-add an image id to a personal filter can be done, though it’s a bit beyond my skill level as a developer.

@Joey  
>button to add specific image to filter  
Yes please!

I would find it easier to find very specific tags if all the tags were alphabetically sorted.

@Background Pony #34CA  
There should be an option for that.

@Background Pony #34CA  
I’m not sure what you mean. All of our tags are alphabetically sorted. The only tags that appear otherwise are the ones designating artist/rating/character. And those are also in alphabetical order.

My suggestion*: Automatic Tag suggestions. Should be doable with common tags  
(I know, because I am currently experimenting with deep learning)
 
*Not that it would directly affect me because I never uploaded an image here.

@Zeb  
All of our tags are alphabetically sorted  
Sure– on an image page that already has them. For someone wanting to check the spelling of a name or see if a tag exists already, there currently is no alphabetized list of all available tags.

@TexasUberAlles  
In those cases you can enter just a few letters of the tag name to narrow the search down. That would probably be even more accurate than alphabetical given just how many tags there are.
 
Think of it this way:  
Sort them alphabetically: You’re able to have a better idea of which page to start at, or at least can start on the first page containing that letter. But there is still 1,110 pages of tags. So just listing alphabetically doesn’t narrow down that much.
 
Current: type in either one of the words, or a few of the letters if you can’t remember the spelling, receive a list of only the tags that contain that word/combination of letters.
 
Possibly we could add alphabetizing to it and that might narrow things down even further. But I’m having trouble seeing how that may actually help find something given the sheer number of tags there are.
 
Plus: Being listed by number of images they’re on lets you know which tags are actually in use, so you know that if you’re looking at the tags that have only 10, 15, or so images under them, you might be looking at the wrong tag.

@Zeb  
You’re basically arguing a preference for looking up a word via Google automatic search suggestions rather than having a dictionary, so I’m leaving before I start using profanity.

@TexasUberAlles  
I’m sorry. I’m just having trouble understanding what you mean then.
 
I’m trying to picture the two different methods, where one is searching through possibly dozens if not hundreds of pages for a specific tag, while the other is getting a list possibly as short as a few tags depending on how much of the tag name you remember.
 
And if you don’t remember any of the tag name, then alphabetical would be entirely useless.
 
Maybe we’re thinking of two different scenarios here.
 
What I’ve been describing is: Situations where you don’t know what a tag is at all. No clue what it may be called, but you have the general idea of what it’s about. “I know it’s about the character bending backwards, so I’ll check any of the tags with ‘bend’ in them.” Or: “I can’t remember the ship name for Rarity and Octavia, but I know it’s some combination of their names, so I’ll enter part of a name and see what turns up.”
 
What was the scenario you were working under?

@TexasUberAlles  
We have a dictionary, it’s the /tags page. Search there works; having it in alphabetical or really any order isn’t going to matter because there are… 1111 pages.

What do you think of full on youtube embeds and Webm support like 4chan.org, 5chon, 8ch.net and some of the lesser chans already do?
 
Also, I honestly think that there is nothing wrong with at least showing a mark of some sort so you can tell if that person is banned from the site, if you folks won’t allow the construction of a full-on public banned user list.

Maybe not for temp bans, but potentially for permabans, just a small thing next to/replacing the member for x years thing on their profile page.

Hello? Mods? Devs?

@Background Pony #C300  
One day they will answer you, one day…

@The-luna-fan  
Or maybe…  

@Yoshimon1  
XD _{~But we’re are gonna get banned if we keep whith this thing}~

@The-luna-fan  
Yeah…
 
@Background Pony #C300 and the actual suggestion:  
I don’t really think we need Youtube or WebM embeds here, at least not in picture comments. They can already get pretty big and overloaded with picture embeds sometimes, videos would be a bit too much imo. Maybe as a feature exclusive to the forums…

@Yoshimon1  

 
Well some sites deal with it that you have to click an expansion link to embed it into the side and watch it. That would be less straining, but probably a bit harder to implement. On the other hand, you can already leaf a link in the first place… Embeed would just be more convenient, since you don’t have to load another tab or an entire page.

I’m fully against Youtube embeds because people are notoriously bad at knowing when to stop, and often image embeds can be overdone to the point of lag and strain. Links are fine, I barely click on them anyway.

@Background Pony #C300  
I suspect support for WebM anything is being held up for the same reason that they don’t allow WebM clips to be uploaded as image posts: ^{(From this response by The Smiling Pony})