Sorry @Martin, this fix didn't make the deadline for this week, but I'll try to resolve it before the next refresh. — Aaron Bertrand 58 secs ago

Try asking this question over at History of Science and Mathematics Stack Exchange. — Elements In Space 33 secs ago

AFAIK, this either never worked or has been this way for a long time. I don't think it's a new problem. See <2k users can't edit own posts or community wiki posts with keyboard shortcuts — VLAZ 6 secs ago

Spam. Please flag as spam. — greg-449 46 secs ago

@Joachim not sire recommendation, rather looks like OP is after "hybrid sites" i.e. site that can accept questions that can fit in more than one existing SE site. — Shadow Wizard Love Zelda 6 secs ago

Are we going to have a lot of broken links and image previews? — A P 19 secs ago

Of the 4 mandatory tags, @wizzwizz4, support seemed to make the most sense to me, because the post isn't quite a post inviting discussion. On the other hand, it seemed like it could serve as a historical support reference in case folks need to look up when the change took place, and potentially any conversations about why certain decisions were made — but I don't feel strongly about it. Feel free to retag if you feel the alternative is more appropriate. — JNat ♦ 58 secs ago

Does this answer your question? Moderators accepting answers on user's behalf after a certain time period — Robert Longson 16 secs ago

Acceptance is outdated anyway. The community already marks its approval by voting. There is no point in having a separate mechanism; this proposal is backwards and would waste effort. — Nij 22 secs ago

Actually, I would want to say that Stack Exchanges are not forum, you can see meta.stackexchange.com/questions/92107/…. — user1176409 57 secs ago

You're asking at the completely wrong site. Did you mean to post that at StackOverflow.com? — πάντα ῥεῖ just now

I cannot post on stackoverflow.com, I don't know how to properly insert the code. — Kurt Verzosa 17 secs ago

I think enough time has passed since High-rep users should be exempt from answer-to-comment autoconversion that it makes sense to have the conversation again; 11 years is quite a long time. — zcoop98 44 secs ago

It's the same here as Stack Overflow as far as putting code in a question. — Robert Longson 29 secs ago

Just read the advanced Editor help there thoroughly. You even managed to post your code halfway properly here. — πάντα ῥεῖ 35 secs ago

I suspect they might be hitting one of the restrictions preventing posting too much code without enough explanatory text outside of code formatting... Or some other restriction. — V2Blast 12 secs ago

thanks guys for the input, I have posted my question now on stackoverflow. — Kurt Verzosa 49 secs ago

You should delete it here. — Robert Longson 21 secs ago

@KarlKnechtel well, if making an observation of a event is bragging, then I would call your observation also bragging. Both would be wrong observations, however, because I'm not bragging and your observation is innacurate. — Braiam 6 secs ago

Usually I try to explain my reason for downvoting if the reason is not already obvious, such as if the question is close-worthy and explained already in the close notice. — CPlus 13 secs ago

Sorry, but how does requiring images at least 160x160 helps to prevent bad images? Can you please give any sources to this claim? Second, if this is really the case, how a service like imgur does not have such limitations? Sorry again but this reason makes zero sense to me. — Shadow Wizard Love Zelda 59 secs ago

@Shadow Not sure where the tone is coming from, but I am not claiming images larger than 160x160 are somehow inherently safer (if I had to guess I'd say the opposite is probably true - unsafe images are probably more common above 160x160). It's that the detection method we are using may need images to be larger than 160x160 in order to classify them appropriately. As far as what Imgur is doing - well, I can't tell you that. I don't work there. ;) — Slate ♦ 43 secs ago

@Rmano I've posted an update on this issue on another Meta Stack Exchange post. — Slate ♦ 21 secs ago

@Slate Maybe it would make more sense to say "The 160x160 size limit is a requirement imposed by software we're using as a safety feature"? — Bryan Krause 18 secs ago

The tone comes from mistrust and disappointment, simple as that. Not you personally, the company in general, that now choose to use some fancy AI image recognition and it will cause lots of valid images to be blocked. Sure, it will block more bad images. But it will also block many valid images, and the blanket block of images smaller than 160px is just part of that. And sadly, it's just a part of an ever growing chain of such decisions, that I find bad. It might be just me, and I do try to keep the tone fair, but I can't change the way I feel. — Shadow Wizard Love Zelda 38 secs ago

@Shadow I don't agree that safety systems are going to block "lots of valid images." We are using long-trusted and standard industry methods. If you notice a significant proportion of uploads being incorrectly blocked, I'd encourage you to report it, because that is absolutely a bug and means the system is doing something highly unexpected. — Slate ♦ 27 secs ago

@Bryan Before I can say that with certainty, we need to wrap up some discussions and explore a few more options. But I will try to make the language a bit clearer. — Slate ♦ 57 secs ago

@Slate unlike what the announcement says, the new upload isn't active here on MSE yet, so I can't check the proportion of valid images being blocked, I'm active only here, but I will do once you apply the new upload here. Quick example from the top of my head: images like those in the top answer to this question will probably get blocked when classified as "not fitting", and that is a mild example. Yes, some people find such images inappropriate but all those years SE did allow them, and each site should decide on its own. — Shadow Wizard Love Zelda 12 secs ago

@Shadow None of the images in that post are blocked by the new safety feature. — Slate ♦ 15 secs ago

"Don't expect an immediate update here, but know that we're aware of the issue and are evaluating approaches to addressing it. Thanks for your patience." this is blocking a large number of images posted to tex.stackexchange unpostable, it is very common to need to show the output of one or two lines of output text and almost always if you select a region and paste in you hit this limit and have to repost with pointless white space. Please could the restriction be removed while you evaluate options rather than making the site so difficult to use while you do the evaluation? — David Carlisle 27 secs ago

@David I will bring this up as a possibility at the next team meeting, but I can't make a promise about it. I do suspect that if we're close to finding a way forward the answer will be "just hold on for a little, we'll get there." — Slate ♦ 10 secs ago

Yep, the minimum size for PhotoDNA, a common free-use checker for known CSAM content, is 160x160 pixels. (cc @ShadowWizardLoveZelda) — Sonic the Anonymous Hedgehog 51 secs ago

The new uploader is definitely a hair slower than Imgur was. Unfortunately ~3 sec upload time just isn't slow enough for us to want to prioritize work on performance, however. As always though, if folks really do feel this is too long, let me know and I'll take that feedback to the team. — Slate ♦ 24 secs ago

Hi circuit, welcome to the Stack Exchange Network Meta site! I'm not sure which search brought you here but the problem you describe will not be answered on this specific site. To get an expert's answer for the topic of your question you'll have to find and then re-post on the proper site. Check How do I ask a good question and What is on topic on the target site to make sure your post is in good shape. Your question is definitely off-topic on Meta and is better deleted here. — Brian61354270 30 secs ago

@Richard Still thinking about this... — Slate ♦ just now

@Slate - There's an optimal curve that runs from the initial excitement of joining, growing as a user, gaining additional tools and (finally) becoming a moderator that is fundamentally broken here. — Richard 54 secs ago

@Slate - There are many ways to resolve this, but more regular elections, term limits and larger moderation teams seems a good way to go. It creates less of an us vs. them feeling if you can become a 'them' relatively easily. — Richard 35 secs ago

Try: Electrical Engineering, but as Brian says, take the tour, read-up in the help centre before posting to ensure your question is on-topic and in shape. — W.O. 21 secs ago

This seems like the policy for moderation of such questions needs to be established on a per-site basis, rather than be imposed from here on MSE. — Makyen 13 secs ago

If you have a legitimate concern about moderation, make a complaint to the Community Management team. Vague assertions and leading questions on Meta SE achieve nothing. — Nij 34 secs ago

Hi Eric Dilley, welcome to the Stack Exchange Network Meta site! I'm not sure which search brought you here but the problem you describe will not be answered on this specific site. To get an expert's answer for the topic of your question you'll have to find and then re-post on the proper site. Check How do I ask a good question and What is on topic on the target site to make sure your post is in good shape. Your question is definitely off-topic on Meta and is better deleted here. — Brian61354270 just now

@Makyen what is the SE policy on per-site moderation policy? — user253751 11 secs ago

Perhaps a solution could be to check whether the images are actually being used on a StackExchange post? If people are using the Post Question form to upload dodgy images, then copying & pasting the Markdown to another unrelated site, and discarding their question draft - could you just delete the images? And rely on the review queues to flag dodgy images? At least for now… — Danny Beckett 50 secs ago