Posts

• Site rules #6 and #8 - bullet points are inline, not actual formatted bullet points
• Rules in the report reason dropdown menu don’t match the site rules
• Email link near the bottom of the Privacy Policy is misspelled, “ops@yantabus.ai” (the actual mailto: href is spelled correctly, though)
• About Uploading should probably give “prompter:” as an example instead of “artist:”
• On Takedown Requests, both “Rules” links are broken, linking to /rules when they should link to /pages/rules
• FAQ page:
  • The various sections that explain Rule #9 questions about quality and artifacts could be improved by linking to the relevant sections of the AI Quality Guidelines
  • Under “I found two tags that mean the same thing, what should I do?”, it says to contact staff about it - is that really what you want, or should it instead say to bring it up in the tagging forum? (BTW, it also presently has the misspelled word “conact” instead of “contact”)
  • Under “Who can edit tags and the source URL on an image?” it says, “Any non-banned registered user can.” However, unregistered users presently can edit tags after solving a captcha. Issue in the FAQ or issue in the site configuration?
  • The link in the answer to “How do I rename my account?” is broken, pointing to /registration/edit when it should point to /settings/edit
• On the API page:
  • The link in “You can find your authentication token in your account settings.” also is broken, pointing to /registration/edit when it should point to /settings/edit
  • The link in “The interested reader may find the implementations of these endpoints here.” points to Derpibooru’s Github, when it should point to Tantabus’ Github.
  • The example JSON in the section “Posting Images” could be redone using an example from Tantabus instead of Derpibooru.
  • Under “Oembed Responses”, provider_name and provider_url should list Tantabus info, not Derpibooru.

Images that fail one of the criteria listed further down may to be deleted.

Practically all the examples of errors listed below could be be spotted and fixed before upload

These sort of artifacts commonly appear on the the corners of an image

Artifact on plant leave is clearly not a detail related to the plant.

Extra limbs, miss-sized torsos or limbs

Pinkie’s left forelg vanishes into her apron or just missing entirely.

Big Mac’s arm would be unnaturally long, particularly as it’s wouldn’t be straight.

Bad hands, too many fingers, things bending how they shouldn’t, weird bumps… Stylization is OK, fleshblobs are not.

AJ’s fingers aren’t great, but they’re not obviously wrong or the close to being the focus of the image.

Weird eyes, extra nostrils, mouths that just aren’t right, eyelashes and eyebrows that are blobs or simply broken… There’s a lot of small things that can go wrong here, but given how important the face is, they have a lot of impact; faces are important!

Iris / pupil shapes aren’t perfect, but not too bad either. Vague muzzle outline is again OK for cartoonish styles. (and AI really likes four freckes…)

The two characters on the left are noticeably low quality, and the Flutershy clone on the right is a mess.

That beach hair would snap immediately, and one of the supports o the back vanishes.

The outline isn’t bad or crunchy, and the weird eyes tears likely intentional.

For a fashion magazine cover, the focus would be the photo/model, so fake “ponish” language is fine. and the big magazine title text is OK; however, the smaller text is mostly just chicken scratches.

The sign at the top isn’t too prominent or seems important

PLOT TWIST: Imagine you post real art in Tantabus, but it get deleted because its not real ai pictures
>>2017874t

Im just joking around ;p