A (hopefully) helpful AI suggestion

[dolphinprncss1001]

Hey!
I lost a ton of galleries (about 200) due to the enforcing of the AI category rule. It really sucked, but I'm not here to argue with the rule. I almost never visited the forums, but now that I have, I realize the rule was publicized there. I was in the wrong, for sure, and paid the price.

I know it has created heartache for me and other AI creators to have our galleries disappear and I can only imagine it increases the workload for the mods/admins. This might be a way to help explain the rule and keep people from breaking it:

As I was reuploading today I noticed that the first "create a new gallery" upload page asks for title and then says "Categories:
You can select up to three genres that best describe the content of your gallery". I'm not a coder, and so this might be difficult, but I wonder if it might be possible to add into that text "Categories:
You can select up to three genres that best describe the content of your gallery, unless you are uploading AI content, then you should only choose "AI Generated". Again, I'm not a coder and so I don't know how difficult this is, but I wanted to at least share what might be a helpful idea.

I have also been going through the "AI Generated" galleries and when I see someone breaking the "multiple category" rule, I've been messaging to warn them. If you're an AI creator on here, please join me in doing this. We can't leave it all up to the mods/admins, they will get testy with us as a group if people keep on breaking the rule - even if they are breaking it without realizing it.

Thanks for reading
~dolphinprncss1001

[jonblacker]

I for one would support this.

[iFreja]

@dolphinprncss1001 - I completely agree with what you've written, and I think you've identified a structural problem that is causing a lot of the rule breaking in the first place. It's something I have had drafted and been thinking about constantly seeing galleries get deleted.

And to any mods or admins reading this:

I genuinely love this site. I've been visiting it for a long time and became an active user over the past year. I love AI-generated art, I have lots of posts planned, and will continue contributing here. So thank you for the ongoing work to keep the site running and functioning.

I also think the moderation on this site is generally fantastic. I very rarely come across genuinely illegal material, and when something serious does appear, it seems to get dealt with quickly.

That's actually why the current situation is so frustrating for me. The kind of work I love and want to see more of is disappearing because of a category violation.

I don't mean any of this to undermine the moderators or the site's rules. I hope this is taken in the spirit it's intended: constructive criticism from someone who genuinely likes the site and wants it to work better.

I understand why the AI rule exists

The site clearly wants two separate buckets of content:

AI
→ AI content and its subcategories

NON-AI
→ everything else and its subcategories

And I understand and agree with the reason for that segregation. Some users don't want any AI, regardless of how good or bad it is. That's completely fair. Someone browsing a non-AI category should be able to reasonably expect not to encounter AI there. It also keeps the content clean. AI content is clearly categorized and a user can filter with tags if they want.

So I'm not arguing that the rule shouldn't exist.

I'm arguing that if the desired outcome is binary segregation, that segregation needs to be built into the upload system, not just written into a forum rule.

Firstly, the wording and semantics in the rule creates a genuine ambiguity.

The forum rules says:

https://www.imagefap.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=17&t=20245

"If your gallery contains AI pictures then the only type of category you can choose will be AI. No other categories can be added."

https://www.imagefap.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=17&t=22361

...still don't understand they can only choose the AI category if any of the pictures in the gallery are AI.

I think the wording matters here.

"Can" and "cannot" can sound like a description of what the system actually permits.

"Will" suggests that something will happen upon category selection.

"Must" and "must not" are naturally instructional.

If I am instructed to:

"Go up the road. There are three bridges. The only bridge you can use will be Bridge 1. You cannot use the other two."
I expect that when I get there, Bridges 2 and 3 will somehow be unusable or totally unavailable to me because I was told I cannot use them.
But if I arrive and there's a sign saying:

"Use any bridge you prefer."

then there is a contradiction in the instructions.

In contrast:

If I am told:

"Go up the road. There are three bridges. The only bridge you must use is Bridge 1. You must not use the other two."

Then when I get there, even if a sign says "use any bridge". I'll probably still only use Bridge 1. Because I was told that I must only use Bridge 1.

That's essentially what happens with the category selector.

The forum says:

AI is the only category you can choose. No other categories can be added.

The upload page says:

"You can select up to three genres that best describe the content of your gallery."

And the software actually allows the user to select three.

So imagine someone who has actually read the forum rule and then goes to upload an AI gallery that is also Anime and Cosplay. (I have an example of this at the end of this post)

They see:

"Select up to three categories that apply."

They remember:

"AI is the only category you can choose."

Then they discover that the interface will actually let them select:

AI + Anime + Cosplay

At that point, there is a genuine question:

"Am I supposed to select all the categories that apply, or am I supposed to select only AI?"

I can absolutely understand someone interpreting the forum wording as describing a structural restriction that the upload system is supposed to enforce. "The only category will be AI"

Now, I'm not suggesting every rule needs to go on the upload page
I can already imagine the response:

"Where does it end? Should we put every site rule on the upload page? Should we have a giant wall of text listing every banned category, website, person, source, tag, etc.?"

No. Absolutely not.

I don't think that would be reasonable either.

I can see that there are sites in the Forbidden Content threads in the forum rules. But we don't have a checkbox on the upload page saying:

"I declare that I have not uploaded content from SuicideGirls." or "My gallery is not from Chloe18.com"

Nor do we have a checkbox for every conceivable rule.

That's not what I'm suggesting.

The reason I think this particular rule is different is that the site has already reduced the decision to a relatively small number of category checkboxes.

The system knows exactly what the AI checkbox is.
The system knows exactly what the other category checkboxes are.

And the site's written and manually enforced policy says:

AI + anything else = invalid.

That's a finite, mechanically identifiable condition.

So I'm not saying:

"Put every rule on the upload page."

I'm saying:

"Where the interface creates a specific choice that has a special exception, either clearly communicate that exception at the point of choice or, preferably, have the software enforce it."

Now, I believe there are three broad types or "intention" of uploader where AI is concerned.
(I'm obviously not claiming these are measured statistics, but I think there are roughly three different types of uploader)

1. The Malicious Flooder - probably a small minority

Someone who knows the rule and deliberately ignores it.
Maybe they want to put AI into non-AI categories for maximum exposure. Maybe they simply don't care about the rule.
They're going to break the rule regardless of how clearly it's written.

Fine.

If that's who we're dealing with, let's assume they're malicious and design the system accordingly.

2. The Crossover Creator - a smaller but meaningful group

This is someone who may have actually read the rules but interprets the category interface differently.
They're thinking:

AI + Anime + Cosplay

because all three describe their gallery.

They're not necessarily trying to sneak AI into the non-AI categories. They may genuinely believe they're following the instruction to select the categories that best describe the gallery.

3. The Oblivious Uploader - probably the largest group (and most users who upload AI content likely fall into this group)

They don't visit the forum regularly.
They haven't seen the AI rule.

They see:

"You can select up to three genres that best describe the content of your gallery."

So they select three.

They're not trying to evade anything.
They simply didn't know.

I've actually messaged users myself when I've noticed AI galleries using multiple categories; sending them the links to the rules and explaining the rules. Telling them that they must not select any other category if they have AI in their gallery. Of the people who replied to me, they genuinely had no idea about the rule and they changed their categories after I explained it. Is that an excuse for them not to read the rules?, No. But it highlights the reality of the proportion of users on this site that don't; something which the current manual moderation of improperly tagged galleries is trying to tackle.

That's obviously a completely unscientific and tiny sample, so I'm not claiming anything quantitatively.

But what I found interesting was that these weren't necessarily low-effort AI uploads. Some were creators whose work I considered genuinely high quality, with obvious effort put into the generations, ideas, curated galleries and presentation with storylines.

They simply didn't know. (Again, yes they should have read the rules but if the reality is that most users don't then the use of the site will fall to the level of the systems not rise to the level of the rules)

So let's assume ALL of users that upload AI are potentially malicious; as currently the rules and manual deletion enforcement treats any uploader that selects "AI + any other category" as such.

Let's treat these uploaders as users that want to knowingly break the rules, waste mod time and mix categories resulting in an undesirable outcome of AI content in the other categories.

This is where I think the logic of the solution becomes really simple.

Instead of trying to determine whether someone is honest, confused, oblivious or malicious, build the upload process so that it handles all of them.

You get a three-stage forward system and a historical data clean:

1. WARN

Put a clear warning directly beside the category selector.

For example:

"WARNING! If your content contains any AI generated content, you MUST ONLY select the "AI Generated" category. Selecting any other category will result in your gallery being deleted.
If your gallery does not contain AI, you may select up to 3 categories that apply."

This catches the ordinary uploader.

They see the warning and think:

"Oh. This is AI. I only select AI."

Done.

The malicious uploader will ignore it.

That's okay.

A warning isn't supposed to magically stop someone who deliberately wants to break the rules.

It's there to make sure the person who didn't know cannot reasonably say they weren't told.

2. PREVENT

Now let's assume the uploader either ignored the warning, didn't see it, their browser didn't display it properly, they're using a screen reader/accessibility setup, JavaScript failed, or they're simply determined to select three categories.

They select:

Big Tits
then
Ebony
Then they click:
AI Generated

The system immediately unchecks the first two and disables the conflicting categories.

Now they have:

AI Generated

Only.

They can either:

A) upload the compliant gallery,

or

B) get frustrated and leave.

Either outcome is preferable to a mixed AI/non-AI gallery being created. As the point of the rule is to have galleries with two states of categorization:

"Ai Generated" and its direct counterpart: "Anything excluding AI Up to 3 Categories"

The same thing happens regardless of which order they select them in.

If they select:

Big Tits → Ebony → AI

AI wins.

If they select:

AI → Big Tits → Ebony

the other categories remain unavailable.

At this point, the software has prevented an accidental violation and made deliberate violation substantially harder.

3. ENFORCE

Now let's take the genuinely malicious user.

They really, really want to select three categories.

They know the rule.

They ignored the warning.

They somehow get around the checkbox restrictions or manipulate the page so that they can submit:

AI + Big Tits + Ebony

Fine.

The backend catches it.

When the gallery is submitted:

IF AI Generated is present → strip every other category before saving.

So the database ends up with:

AI Generated

not:

AI Generated + Big Tits + Ebony

The rule has now been enforced regardless of what happened in the browser.

This is important because the browser interface shouldn't be the final authority. The server/database should ultimately enforce the rule.

So the upload procedure becomes:

1. WARN
Tell them the rule.

2. PREVENT
Don't let the normal interface create the forbidden combination.

3. ENFORCE
If someone somehow gets around the interface, enforce the rule before the gallery is saved.

And it doesn't require the moderators to decide whether each uploader is honest or malicious.

4. CLEAN UP THE EXISTING DATABASE

There's also a fourth step that could deal with galleries that are already in the system.

If the rule is now:

AI Generated + any other category = invalid

then why not do a one-time database sweep?

The site presumably already knows which categories are associated with each gallery.

A script could go through the existing galleries and find any where:

AI Generated + one or more other categories

are present.

For each of those galleries, the script could:

Keep: AI Generated
Remove: every other category

That would clean up the existing database without requiring moderators to manually find and delete every gallery that has the prohibited combination.

Then the upload system could enforce the same rule going forward.

So you would have:

Existing galleries:
Database sweep → remove conflicting categories → retain AI Generated.

New uploads:
WARN → PREVENT → ENFORCE.

That seems much more sustainable than repeatedly discovering the same category violation after a gallery has already been uploaded.

Obviously, I'm not a developer and I don't know how your database is structured, so the exact implementation is for your developers to determine. I'm just looking at the problem from the outside and thinking that if the site already knows which gallery belongs to which categories, this seems like something that could potentially be cleaned up programmatically rather than manually as the data is there.

There is one edge case I can think of.

"What about an AI image the uploader doesn't realizes is AI?"

Someone genuinely believes their gallery is non-AI.

They select:

Big Tits + Asses + Arabian

They don't select AI because they genuinely don't know there is AI content in the gallery.

Later, someone flags it.

The moderators can check it and deal with it according to the normal moderation process.

That's fundamentally different from the uploader deliberately selecting:

AI + two non-AI categories

when the system has already told them not to.

You can't completely eliminate human judgment from moderation, and I'm not suggesting you should.

I'm suggesting that the known, mechanically data detectable violation should be handled mechanically.

And this protects everyone

It protects the users who want zero AI.
It protects creators who misunderstood the rule.
It makes deliberate violations harder.
It reduces accidental violations.
It cleans up existing conflicting category assignments.
And it reduces repetitive manual work for the moderators.

Most importantly, it makes the software and the policy agree with each other.

If the intended database is:

AI on one side

and

NON-AI on the other

then:

AI + another category shouldn't be a valid state that the upload system knowingly permits.

Finally, the personal side of this:

I've seen some of my absolute favourite galleries disappear.

These weren't just random galleries to me. Some were incredibly well thought out, with obvious hours of work going into the generations, concepts, storylines, character design, curation, organization and uploading.

Heartache doesn't even come close. Devastation.

I've become genuinely anxious wondering whether today will be the day I log in and discover that one of my favourite galleries is gone without even having the opportunity to save it first.

I don't always have another half hour available to manually download a gallery image by image because I'm worried it might disappear tomorrow. Or message every single user to warn them of the danger of their gallery being deleted or inform them of the rules.

The forum's own downloading announcement https://www.imagefap.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=17&t=17734 says that if you like a gallery and want to download it, you can add the gallery to your Favorites and it will still be there when you come back.

That's a great, but it doesn't help if the gallery itself gets deleted due to improper categorsation.

So @dolphinprncss1001, I really appreciate you bringing this up and trying to warn other creators yourself.

I've been doing the same thing where I can, but obviously neither of us can message everyone.

And to the mods/admins (hopefully) reading this:

I genuinely love this site.

I love AI-generated art. I have lots of posts planned. I've been a user of the site for a long time and have been an active user over the past year. I contribute here.

I'm not asking for an exception to the AI rule.
I'm not asking for AI to be allowed in the other categories.
I'm not asking for the moderators to be more lenient.
I'm asking for the site to make the rule technically enforceable at the point of upload.

If the desired outcome is:

AI on one side.

Non-AI on the other.

then that switch needs to be built, not merely written.

I don't know how the site is written or programmed, so I obviously don't know what complications might exist behind the scenes. But given that the site already has a functioning upload system, category system, gallery database and moderation infrastructure, this seems like a relatively contained problem that could potentially be solved at the software level rather than through ongoing manual moderation.

I'm not asking the moderators to do less moderation.

I'm suggesting that the software could prevent them from having to repeatedly moderate the same mechanically identifiable category violation.

I hope this is taken in the constructive spirit intended. I'm saying all of this precisely because I genuinely like this site and want to keep using it.

And if I've misunderstood any part of how the system is intended to work, I'm more than happy to be corrected.

P.S. One final example of the confusion I'm talking about

I came across this forum post entitled:
AI Galleries "Flagged" category confusion
Link: https://www.imagefap.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=22432&p=77273

and I think it actually demonstrates the problem quite well.

The poster says that they had read the more recent forum announcement, but weren't aware of the older AI-only rule. They then say:

"On that note though, there are three category boxes when uploading so it is a little counter intuitive."

They go on to suggest essentially the same thing I'm suggesting here: if AI is selected, the other category boxes should deselect themselves or disappear.

What I find particularly interesting about this post is that I don't think this person belongs in the "malicious flooder" category at all. This is someone who actually reads the rules.

They are someone who has read the rules, wants their galleries to reach the appropriate audience, and is trying to understand how the category system is supposed to work.

They even explain that they use categories such as AI Generated, Celeb, Fakes and Animated GIFs, and that they add celebrity names because they assume categories/tags are intended to help people find relevant content.

In other words, this is exactly the kind of Crossover Creator I'm talking about.

They're not saying:

"I know AI isn't allowed in other categories, but I'm going to do it anyway."

They're essentially saying:

"The upload page gives me three category boxes and tells me to use them to describe my content, so why wouldn't I use the categories that describe my content?"

That's an important distinction.

It also demonstrates something else: people are apparently giving the instructions at the point of upload significant weight.

And I think that's completely understandable.

If the forum says one thing but the actual upload interface says:

"You can select up to three genres that best describe the content of your gallery"

while simultaneously allowing three categories to be selected, I don't think it's unreasonable for a user to follow the instruction they're looking at while actually performing the upload.

This is why I keep coming back to the idea that the rule needs to be reflected in the upload mechanism itself.

If the intended rule is genuinely:

AI → AI Generated ONLY

then the uploader shouldn't have to reconcile two conflicting instructions and guess which one has priority.

The software can simply make the answer unambiguous.

And finally, I want to stress that I'm not making this post to complain for the sake of complaining.

I've put quite a lot of thought into this because I genuinely care about the site. (And yes, with the help of AI to structure my thoughts, criticisms and suggestions in the most constructive way possible).

I know a huge amount of work goes into running and moderating a site like this every day, and I genuinely appreciate it. I love the site, I enjoy being here, and I want to continue contributing to it.

So apologies for the very long read. I could have simply complained about galleries disappearing, but I thought it would be more useful to actually think through why the confusion is happening and what could potentially prevent it from happening in the first place.

Hopefully this is read by someone who can take this on board and, even if none of my suggestions are ultimately practical for the site's particular setup, at least gives you something to consider.

If you made it to the end, thanks for reading.

[JizzL0BBER]

Another idea: Post your calculator's wet dreams somewhere else, on a dedicated website for slop.

[Richdeer]

Was thinking the same thing . Yes, we as AI "art" creators are to blame, because we didn't read the rules, yet were given plenty of time to fix our mistakes. I was able to reupload everything back ( in one gallery because everyone have seen it and Pony is an old news) but still i lost all the comments and it sucks.

It is more of the code problem with own ability to choose more then one category and the website allow us to break it's rules.

I have another issue tho - visibility of the content. It is true to me - AI is a slop everyone can make which floods even it's own category. I can't add categories to make my art stand out or be filtered by a viewing user.

I honestly post my stuff to entertain people but also to scratch my ego a little as well. It feels good to see your art appreciated. And i was posting my photoshop art long before AI was a thing. No one told me to post it separetly from real photos, yet i know what my art wasn't supreme. I am saying that because i love this website and i don't want to switch to whatever website with paid content or super strict rules. I like it here, but AI art is in fact hurts itself by sheer volume and low quality across the board. It gave too many people with nieche fetishes ability to make content and post it everywhere (myself, obviously included) . I like how Rule34 did it. They just added one button - you click it and every AI picture is gone from your feed and this button is near a search bar on every page so you won't miss it.

SO yea.... My point and probably a question for my fellow AI artists - how do you make your content stand out now? Can you add tags or is it forbidden too?

[longhairfish]

So you guys know, I see what you say.

AI here on imagefap "is what it is" and nothing will change.

No new code will be written. We will not hire someone to watch every gallery uploaded correctly.

I will say I do have a volunteer to deletes 500 - 800 AI galleries improperly tagged every day.

[JizzL0BBER]

I will say I do have a volunteer to deletes 500 - 800 AI galleries improperly tagged every day.

AWESOME.

[longhairfish]

One last thing before I lock this boring topic.

If you go to a country you have never been to and you spit on the ground then get arrested and tossed in jail, you better not complain saying "I didn't know that was a law to spit on the ground".

Too bad for you! You should have read the country rules before coming.

See?