Welp, Guess what, It takes too long for me to get back to e621, I feel like I'm doing time-traveling. (´・ω・｀)
So, While translating the Rules/Code of Conduct into Japanese recently, I noticed a thing.

～～～～～～～～～～～～
On e621, as announced in Posting-Abuse rule, "Removing any watermark(s) or signature(s) from submissions" is prohibited.
(( Wait, It should apply everywhere, Not just on this site, No? ))

However, there is no rule for prohibiting edit.
Furthermore, it is even mentioned officially in the "Edits" section of the UG.

～～～～～～～～～～～～
The "Edit" I am talking about would includes specifically the following：

• uncensored / censor_removal_edit　　※ Implication topic is here → https://e621.net/forum_topics/33866
• gender_edit , nude_edit , human_edit , Adding and/or Deleting characters/parts, ... etc.

Note that, I'm dealing censor_removal_edit and other Edits the same -- both are still Edits, anyway.

～～～～～～～～～～～～
My concern here is, Edits are done by 3rd-parties (who are Not Artists), and often without permissions of the Artists.
Well of course, I ain't saying it applies to every Edit posts.

But.
　Isn't editing identical to claiming the original art cannot be respected As-It-Is?
　Wouldn't it make the Artists let their art go to DNP, Not only edits But ALL of theirs?

That questions make me doubt the meaning of the word "archive" explaining e621 in some places.

In other words, I'm not sure Which is the purpose of e621 archiving/collecting images ...
"Searching by tags like Google-search"　or　"Being a Storage for images like Pixiv/FA" ?

Considering that, I honestly cannot agree with the current Policy/Rule for Edits.

～～～～～～～～～～～～

Now I have a question I would like to ask you.
　What do you think about the existence of Edits on e621 the Archive?

～～～～～～～～～～～～
By the way Let me tell you.
In case you're wondering, I don't have the ability to Edit others' art.　Even if I did, I have no desire to do so, At All.

But ... I have a request to confirm whether a post is Edit without permission or Not, Because he's also concerned something bad might happen if an Edit exists.
Hate to do it if I can ... but I will have to go ask the Artist directly.

I wouldn't say that accepting edits is compromising the site's integrity as an archive, as long as the edits are tagged as such, and the original files are archived too.

As you can see in that list of topics, edits must meet a very high quality threshold in order to be approved, in order to prevent the archive filling up with MS Paint nipples. I believe the way I've heard the staff express it is that only people who are talented enough to be artists in their own right are likely to get their edits approved here.

If artists don't like edits, they can request conditional_dnp status to ban all edits of their work. For example, check out the results for tom_fischbach edit status:any.

kurogi_foxsiv said:
On e621, as announced in Posting-Abuse rule, "Removing any watermark(s) or signature(s) from submissions" is prohibited.
(( Wait, It should apply everywhere, Not just on this site, No? ))

However, there is no rule for prohibiting edit.
Furthermore, it is even mentioned officially in the "Edits" section of the UG.

Just because something seems to be common sense, doesn't mean it is. The rule against removing watermarks and signatures is to very specifically ban it and to prevent rules lawyering.

　Isn't editing identical to claiming the original art cannot be respected As-It-Is?

No, sometimes people believe something can be enhanced with a few changes, it doesn't mean that they considered the original bad or anything of that nature.

That questions make me doubt the meaning of the word "archive" explaining e621 in some places.

In other words, I'm not sure Which is the purpose of e621 archiving/collecting images ...
"Searching by tags like Google-search"　or　"Being a Storage for images like Pixiv/FA" ?

Archiving has many definitions, but generally follows the same concept of storing something, so the being storage is closer to the meaning. That doesn't mean they are mutually exclusive though.
E621 is a booru style image board, so it stores images and has functions for searching those images based on tags applied. The act of storing something in a central area makes it an archive. It just provides tools to look through that archive easily.

wat8548 said:
I wouldn't say that accepting edits is compromising the site's integrity as an archive, as long as the edits are tagged as such, and the original files are archived too.
As you can see in that list of topics, edits must meet a very high quality threshold in order to be approved, in order to prevent the archive filling up with MS Paint nipples. (...)

deadoon said:
No, sometimes people believe something can be enhanced with a few changes, it doesn't mean that they considered the original bad or anything of that nature. (...)

This rule might be intended to prevent trolling or to keep up the quality of e621, as I imagine.
But, my concern is the existence of Edits in general, so Quality is no matter here, sorry.

If e621 was strictly limited to only showing arts that are completely the same as the original and without any editing,
Then I could explain that the purpose of e621 collecting arts is "search".

I wanted to use the legal term Fair-Use in the U.S. , to be honest.
In this way, asking for permission is not required ... technically.　 Though in reality, doing so is recommended on this site, I know.

Having said that, Japan does not have the same one, Moreover people would not be convinced by mentioning the legal.
So, for me as a Japanese, There is only way to say "the purpose of e621 is the same as google", in order to make Japanese audience understand our site.
This way to say is also fair because Google-search is used by Japanese everyday.

... Hm, Since e621 approves of Edits, I can no longer say e621 the purpose of e621 archiving/collecting arts is only for search.

kurogi_foxsiv said:
If e621 was strictly limited to only showing arts that are completely the same as the original and without any editing,

It is primarily to archive and display original art. Edits, while not being the primary purpose of the site, are allowed as long as the quality of the edit is sufficient to be its own post (e.g. it's not just line_art with added coloring from using bucket fill, or censored art run through an AI decensor app). In any case, an unofficial edit is never accepted in place of the original, at most it's accepted along side the original (if it's otherwise good enough).

watsit said:
It is primarily to archive and display original art. Edits, while not being the primary purpose of the site, are allowed as long as the quality of the edit is sufficient to be its own post (...)

Edit is only allowed for secondary purpose, I know that.
As like removing watermarks or signatures is unacceptable, Other Edits are also expected to be difficult for artists and audience to accept. ... Especially when that opponent is Japanese.

What do you think about Edit being allowed to post with no permission, Or how do I explain it to Japanese audience?
I'd avoid not mentioning or ignoring it, if possible.

kurogi_foxsiv said:

What do you think about Edit being allowed to post with no permission, Or how do I explain it to Japanese audience?
I'd avoid not mentioning or ignoring it, if possible.

All posts made by users are created under the assumption that the poster has permission from all relevant parties (artist, commissioner, character owners) to post it. It’s up to the janitors to check whether a post that is pending for approval isn’t DNP, and users may flag the post as such if it’s discovered after the fact.

If an edit violates your permissions, that’s what the takedown page is meant for. Only the permissions of the original artwork is considered when posting edits.

aversioncapacitor' said:
All posts made by users are created under the assumption that the poster has permission from all relevant parties (artist, commissioner, character owners) to post it. It’s up to the janitors to check whether a post that is pending for approval isn’t DNP, and users may flag the post as such if it’s discovered after the fact.

If an edit violates your permissions, that’s what the takedown page is meant for. Only the permissions of the original artwork is considered when posting edits.

If you say so, then alright, I will regard and leave it as ““so””.
Now I'm gonna think of what is good to do.

Thanks.

wat8548 said:
I wouldn't say that accepting edits is compromising the site's integrity as an archive, as long as the edits are tagged as such, and the original files are archived too.

As you can see in that list of topics, edits must meet a very high quality threshold in order to be approved, in order to prevent the archive filling up with MS Paint nipples. I believe the way I've heard the staff express it is that only people who are talented enough to be artists in their own right are likely to get their edits approved here.

If artists don't like edits, they can request conditional_dnp status to ban all edits of their work. For example, check out the results for tom_fischbach edit status:any.

LOL, wasn't that one of the artists where it was the staff, not the artist that requested that because of sooooooo many edits?

alphamule said:
LOL, wasn't that one of the artists where it was the staff, not the artist that requested that because of sooooooo many edits?

takedown #9483
kinda? from the wording it seemed, like as a response to users complaining about good edits getting preferential treatment (i.e. not deleted while shit edits were), NMNY just nuked the lot.

https://e621.net/posts/1524774#comment-7524895 Not sure where to ask, and this was the most recent topic on '3rd party edits'. Do we normally archive the lineart as well? Should I upload that one without the map in the way? I think it's also 3rd-party, like the featureless one.