Flags for copyright infringement do effectively hide/remove pictures from general viewing and make an observation casual.
I don’t think I have seen any content hidden that wasn’t already flagged, but it is possible to hide something without flagging it.
Content that was flagged and then hidden does show up in a search of Flags and shows “Content Hidden” in the Resolution column, so these should be fairly transparent.
It seems like content that is hidden but not flagged (which is/would be very rare I think?) wouldn’t be easily assessable, so it would be nice to have a way to review these. Maybe another option on the Flags search under Resolved for “Hidden” in the dropdown could work.
I just checked on an example user and hidden comments are shown in their comments list and show up as hidden, so I think all is good there.
In regards to
I understand this because it is correct in one way as that identification no longer counts (it’s not affecting the observation) and it also means the user doesn’t “get credit” for hidden IDs (like if they’re doing a school project or whatever). It would be good to have an easy way in the Moderation tools to see if users’ content was hidden to assess patterns of behavior, but I don’t think that they need to show up on the regular user’s identification page (to me).
I personally would not flag/hide myself since it isn’t against the rules though I do leave a comment. A good amount of school projects require their students to show an ID card in the picture (which is a terrible idea, yes, but…), so flagging/hiding the observation essentially means that those students can’t complete their projects. I have seen a couple students get upset/frustrated because their pics with IDs were flagged.
No, but I think that’d be a good idea, to add a filter or something to the Flags page. I suspect most hidden content will also be flagged, but not all of it since curators can hide something without flagging it.
The plan for notifications update is to notify you when your observation’s quality grade changes, so in most of these cases that’s what would happen unless the observation was already casual. Which might cause more retaliatory behavior, we’ll see.
I hear you, although I think I disagree. That count should - unless there’s a bug - only be counting “active” IDs, which also means that one’s withdrawn IDs aren’t included either.
Sensitive information accidentally posted by the observer, such as personal information or the location of threatened species (eg if a map or sign is included)
should be hidden, while
ID cards or badges intentionally placed in the frame
should not be. I tried to differentiate them by intentionality when writing that. In the second case, the user is knowingly posting sensitive info, which is different than someone accidentally selecting and posting an image with sensitive info. That being said, in the second case the person might not be aware of the potential issues involved with including their ID card in a publicly available photo. I put most of the responsibility on the teacher in that case.
Thanks. We definitely have some follow-ups to do on mobile, but the main thing is that the photo is hidden, so a bullying target’s image won’t be there at least.