Help / The Help Forum

This thread was closed automatically due to a lack of responses over the last month.

Hot Topics

[Official Thread] Have an idea for Flickr? Share it here.
Latest: 3 hours ago
New Flickr Notifications Center and Settings available to all members.
Latest: 31 hours ago
[Updated April 26, 2021] Flickr is moving payments to Stripe
Latest: 10 months ago
Welcome to the Flickr Help Forum! Click here to get started and to read our Forum Guidelines.
Latest: 15 months ago

 

Current Discussion

I cannot see pictures only comments and other details
Latest: 14 minutes ago
Is this a bug in the Feed?
Latest: 67 minutes ago
Do we keep the RSS feed for activity/notifications?
Latest: 2 hours ago
User links in notifications bug?
Latest: 2 hours ago
ignore
Latest: 3 hours ago
Is it Flickr? Users? or Is it Me? - Views & Comments vastly reduced.
Latest: 5 hours ago
[BUG?] For a same Photograph, Numbers of shots dispalyed different between Pool Justifed and Squar view (Admin view)
Latest: 6 hours ago
forum for constructive feedback on new notifications
Latest: 9 hours ago
totally confused by sunset happenings
Latest: 10 hours ago
Thumbnail problem
Latest: 13 hours ago
[Acknowledged by Flickr Staff] Organizr still messing up album cover photos
Latest: 14 hours ago
Uploading
Latest: 14 hours ago
More...

Search the Help Forum

[Staff Response] Flickr Moderation Bot flagging safe files as restricted?!?!

Rick Drew - 30 million views! says:

According to this idiotic "bot" this file needs to be restricted for nudity: flic.kr/p/2ma2Ja5

As well as several more similar files. Seriously?
Posted at 1:44AM, 12 July 2021 PDT ( permalink )
katie_ko (staff) edited this topic 2 months ago.

view photos

Coyoty says:

What utility are you using to upload it? Have you made sure the safe settings are set correctly for the file or your account or groups/galleries/albums/etc. it's added to?
Posted 2 months ago. ( permalink )

view photos

mcnod says:

Rick Drew - 27 million views!:

idiotic "bot"

Relax, you can override the moderation bot if it made a mistake:
blog.flickr.net/en/2020/12/16/using-auto-moderation-to-im...
Posted 2 months ago. ( permalink )

view photos

mcnod says:

Rick Drew - 27 million views!:

Seriously?

This is what came to my mind when I saw that you are giving mixed messages. You mark your recent images as "all rights reserved" but also in the description you say " Share, download, cut and paste. Do whatever you want." So do you have model releases from each performer and every member of the audience in each of those photos to give to someone who would "do whatever they want."?
Posted 2 months ago. ( permalink )

view photos

Loverdag - unedited - says:

"Bot flagging safe files as restricted?!?!"
Yes, it does.

And even when we can set it back to "safe" after, it does not change the fact, the bot's misplaced moderation removes all "save" and "moderated" groups added to the picture in the Uploader. And user is "punished" for the bot's mistake because has to add them all back again.

If you are daily Flickr user and not every day you have a lot of time to spend here, this is very unfriendly.

Like the fact Uploder ignores groups opted out from the limit and counts them all into the limit anyway was not user unfriedly enough.

(And please dont tell me that the way as I use groups and add them in Uploader isnt the way you think is the "right one" - as I already read from some users commenting this way others people posts there in the past.
Using groups is not same for everyone. And cerainly its not same for Second life community with different social habits. We have people who actually wants to see their places, creations and events in their groups because they collect them there. And doesnt matter if you are active member of such a group or not, to add it in the Uploader isnt considered rude, when its not done with any other active participation in the group in same moment).
Posted 2 months ago. ( permalink )

view photos

mag3737 says:

Rick Drew - 27 million views!:
Loverdag - unedited -:

The bot is an AI that learns from its mistakes, but only if it knows about them. If you have had false positives, and you have not reported them directly to Flickr via the Help contact email address, you are depriving the bot of opportunities to learn further and do better in the future.

Loverdag - unedited -:

As an impartial observer, it seems to me you have stated here two practical reasons NOT to add photos to groups in the Uploader. Both of these have nothing to do with whether anybody thinks you are rude:

1. The 30/60 thing
2. If the safety bot later flags them, you'll have to re-do the work

Sure, both of these are annoying design/UI problems. Nevertheless, they exist.
Posted 2 months ago. ( permalink )

view photos

Loverdag - unedited - says:

mag3737:

I agree, that was exactly my point.
Adding groups in Uploader was handy option for many years untill these two features made it impractical. But they both were supposed to be improvements, if I am correct. Instead they badly affected the funcionality as the very basic as tool as Uploader is.

Bot will be always bot, limited in its recognition skills.
I would see as better option if it would offer the correction (with warning what may happen when user will post intentionaly wrong security level) but would not force it. Who did genuine mistake would just confirm the correction and nobody would be punished for false positives.
Posted 2 months ago. ( permalink )

view photos

mag3737 says:

Loverdag - unedited -:

Who did genuine mistake would just confirm the correction and nobody would be punished for false positives.


Sadly, this is a case of spoiling it for the rest of us.

The problem (and the reason for the bot) is not the honest people who make genuine mistakes. It's the people who would never fix them.

Flickr is rare among social media sites in that they work hard to allow people to see naughty bits, by working hard to PREVENT people seeing naughty bits if they don't want to. They HAVE TO hide the potential naughtiness in order to continue allowing all the rest of the "honest naughtiness".

Edited by Flickr Staff for language
Posted 2 months ago. ( permalink )
R L Catlow (staff) edited this topic 2 months ago.

view photos

Viejito says:

mag3737:

They HAVE TO hide the potential naughtiness
And they do not do too good a job of it. Given a few minutes, I can come up with dozens of photos, and videos, of close-ups of intercourse in every available orifice, rated SAFE.

I stopped reporting them, considering that in ten minutes Flickr, using the API, can find and sanction more abusers than I can report in a couple of hours, which then would take weeks to be sanctioned.
Posted 2 months ago. ( permalink )

view photos

mag3737 says:

This just demonstrates why a (successful) bot could be useful.
Posted 2 months ago. ( permalink )

view photos

mcnod says:

Viejito:

in ten minutes Flickr, using the API, can find and sanction more abusers than I can report in a couple of hours

This
Posted 2 months ago. ( permalink )

view photos

Loverdag - unedited - says:

But as far as I understood, the bot's moderation can be always set back to "safe" by the user.
It means who wants to do that intentionaly, will do (after the bot corrected it) and the bot cant fix that again.
It means the bot only helps with the genuine mistakes and my solution mentioned above - the moderation offered but not forced - would work on that exactly same as it does today, except the mistaken safe group removal for false positives.
Maybe I'm missing something here but I lack to see how that would be different compare the current state.

--
Viejito:

And they do not do too good a job of it. Given a few minutes, I can come up with dozens of photos, and videos, of close-ups of intercourse in every available orifice, rated SAFE.

Could be the bot did good job, but these are intentionaly "safe" pictures set back to this level by users after the bot corrected it.
Posted 2 months ago. ( permalink )

view photos

mag3737 says:

Loverdag - unedited -:

But as far as I understood, the bot's moderation can be always set back to "safe" by the user.
It means who wants to do that intentionaly, will do (after the bot corrected it) and the bot cant fix that again.

Maybe, but this activity by a user (especially repeated) is something that's also easy for Flickr to detect (automatically), and put a human onto, after which they can take more severe measures such as setting the entire account to restricted, or even deleting the account.
Posted 2 months ago. ( permalink )

view photos

Loverdag - unedited - says:

mag3737:

Maybe, but this activity by a user (especially repeated) is something that's also easy for Flickr to detect (automatically), and put a human onto, after which they can take more severe measures such as setting the entire account to restricted, or even deleting the account.


Should be possible to track the repeatable rejecting of the bot's offered correction, on same principle as you said.
Posted 2 months ago. ( permalink )

view photos

Flickr Staff

cabb88 says:

Hey, all. We've been observing this thread and it seems like a good opportunity to share more about the moderation bot.

To start, Rick Drew - 27 million views!, sorry for the mis-moderation from the bot that you encountered. As mag3737 and mcnod have mentioned, please know that you can correct the bot and move on. It can and will make mistakes and that is why everyone has the option to correct it.

To take a step back, restricted content is welcome on Flickr. In order to provide a community and platform that can house restricted content, we need mechanisms in place to ensure that that content is correctly moderated. The moderation bot is one such mechanism. The bot does a lot of good in this area and while there are some false flags - the bot is accurate the majority of the time.

That said, it's clear from this thread and the others that have come up that there are improvements we need to make when it comes to the experience one has when you get caught in a false flag. Just last week, we reviewed all of the member feedback that we have received about moderation bot false flags. We know that we can improve the language the bot uses and the language in our help documentation to let folks know that false flags do happen and that you can and should correct these false flags. Monitoring the bot's accuracy has been and will remain an ongoing focus, but there's also more work that we can do to understand which communities on Flickr or which specific types of photos are more subject to false flags.

We've also discussed how we might factor in a community member's track record into this system. This would address some of the feedback that you're sharing, Loverdag - unedited -.

For example, if someone has been part of Flickr for some time, has shared on Flickr and has never mis-moderated their work, how can we reward their diligence and the trust they've built in the community? These are problems we'd like to dig into to build a better moderation experience for everyone. To be clear, this is a ways out, but addressing the language and clarity around the bot and monitoring its accuracy are an immediate area of focus for us.

Again, the bot is just one component of moderation on Flickr. Our staff and you, Flickr community members, are another huge part of keeping the community in line with our guidelines so that all communities on Flickr can thrive with whatever content they want to share (in accordance with the guidelines, of course). We don't expect members to act as a one-person moderation team, but bots don't catch everything, our staff doesn't catch everything, thus community reports are vital. We all have a part to play when it comes to holding Flickr to the standards in our community guidelines and content guidelines.

Thanks to all of you for doing your part –– whether that's properly moderating your own content, flagging things for our team to review, or even just participating in this conversation.
Posted 2 months ago. ( permalink )

view photos

Loverdag - unedited - says:

cabb88:

For example, if someone has been part of Flickr for some time, has shared on Flickr and has never mis-moderated their work, how can we reward their diligence and the trust they've built in the community?

I can talk only for myself, maybe others would appreciate some rewards, but to me personaly the greates reward would be if the implemenantion of new features was done more sensitive way and more taking into account how it affects daily user experience.

As was already said above adding groups in the Uploader is now badly affected even with two newer features - not because they were needed and added, but because how they were designed. Both could be done and used other way which would not badly affect older tools.
And thats exactly what I mean - to care about new features better way would be enough for me as reward for being paying customer in long-term. I would much more appreciate that, because it affects my daily experience here, rather then some other "reward".
Posted 2 months ago. ( permalink )

view photos

Flickr Staff

cabb88 says:

Loverdag - unedited -:

Thanks for your reply! To be clear, when I said "how can we reward" there, I meant reward in the sense of creating an experience that takes each member's track record moderating their own work into account and excluding them from the bot. Which is to say that I think we're in agreement. :)
Posted 2 months ago. ( permalink )

view photos

Loverdag - unedited - says:

cabb88:

What you offer as "reward" its actually something what was for everyone* before the new feature was implemented and after the implementation you consider to bring it back as reward for selected accounts only.
(*I mean the option to add groups in Uploader without being worry they will be removed thanks the bot mismoderation).

As paying customer I would be happier if new features won't break the old ones I'm used to use for years and I'm comfortable with.
Posted 2 months ago. ( permalink )

This thread was closed automatically due to a lack of responses over the last month.

Subscribe to a feed of stuff on this page... Feed – Subscribe to help discussion threads