General Tag Discussion

@warc9
 
Seems logical.

@Frustration in Excelsis  
@Background Pony #EC55  
Bawk!
 
(added the tag)

@Background Pony #EC55  
I think it got released on youtube at the same time a bunch of the summertime shorts did, and got bunched in with them.

[Never mind, the issue I brought up resolved itself a moment ago]

Why is there a ‘jackpot’ tag for pictures of female characters tied up?  
Is it entirely based off Family guy?

Shouldn’t this be semi-grimdark or even safe instead of grimdark?
 
>>1155251

@Rainboom Dash  
Semi-grimdark and even that’s a little conservative.

I question the shipping tags.  

@Marx  
Is it entirely based off Family guy?  
Family Guy fans are even worse than most fandoms about assuming everyone else knows the references they drop about their shitty, unfunny cartoon.

I don’t know if this has been brought up, but… Why do we have cases like the tags “photo” and “doodle”, where the tag covers when an image as a whole is one of those, and when one contains those? Like, “photo” could be split into “photo” and “photo (object)”, and similarly for “doodle”.

I just discovered there’s a requested art tag. I’ve only ever really seen and used request before and at first glance there doesn’t seem to be any difference. Is there something I’m missing?

This image is blocked by your current filter - click here to display it anyway

your current filter.

 
Detailed enough anus for explicit? Or stay at questionable?  
And apparently it’s been tagged by a mod as safe before as well.

@Dragonpone  
Definitely not explicit, and of course someone tags it as such immediately because there is incredible inertia when it comes to people understanding ratings and they can’t be assed to look into mentions of moderators rating things.  
The image is a case that can be either safe (simple anus), suggestive (simple anus, but image is otherwise implicative), or questionable (moderately detailed anus).
 
I think the anus qualifies as simple (literally two lines and they’re absolutely tiny compared to the size of the image) and a a bit of a sultry look isn’t suggestive, hence the image is safe.

@Princess Luna  
Frankly that’s absurd. It’s a sultry pose, and I can never agree with any thinking, intelligent character’s anus being safe for six-year-olds.

@Princess Luna  
@cheezedoodle  
I agree with Cheeze.

@cheezedoodle  
Perhaps it should be suggestive due to the sultriness combined with minor nudity.
 
As far as anus ratings, it’s awkward because if it’s just an X, most people (and close to all Japanese artists) won’t care, and it slowly slides towards everyone caring as detail increases, but there’s no one-size-fits-all approach to it.

@Princess Luna  
The whole anus thing is weird, especially when they’re like this.  

 
It’s litreally just this:  
.  
There are people who say it should be bumped up, but over a tiny dot?

@Princess Luna  
@Binkyt11  
Eh, were it just the two lines of an anus I’d probably be more on board to agree, but the fact that the anus itself is outlined and the sultry tone of the drawing makes me think it should at least be questionable.  
I would think the same should be done on something like this were a similar anus to be added, and even that doesn’t have the pronunciation of the anus itself like the former

@Princess Luna  
While I agree with you in principle, I don’t think that image of Aunt Orange is an example of a simplistic anus by any stretch of the definition. There’s too much detail - color, shape, the fact that it protrudes - to the point that I’d say the only reason it looks simple at all is because we’re seeing a tantalizing amount of it, edge-on.
 
To be certain, it is not a cartoonish representation. This moment from Friendship Is Still Magic is literally just lines depicting dingleberries surrounding an anus and a vagina. It’s still on youtube after all these years, amazingly, even though I don’t think anyone would disagree over what exactly they’re looking at. Nor do I think this would fly under the suggestive rating if it were posted here, even if it were cropped to the moment at 1:52 before it pans up…
 
…so why would that be even marginally okay, if things like the Trixie image above are marginally not? I think it boils down to context. There’s a lot more detail to the Trixie picture, raising the bar overall for the importance of details in general, even though this is far less detailed than the animation. However, what this lacks that the animation has in spades is calling attention to it, quite literally.
 
You would need something on the order of Simon’s Cat in terms of simplicity of overall design and lack of sexual overtones before I think most people would be in agreement over the rating. To be frank, there are very, very few images on the site at all that meet that standard. I don’t think this tag should apply to otherwise explicit images, which leaves just about a dozen instances. Possibly less; I’d personally say only 4 images actually qualify.

@WingbeatPony  
^Basically what I meant but in much better words than mine

Is there a tag for schools, as in schools of fish?
 
 
>>1714155p (merged)

@cheezedoodle  
I can never agree with any thinking, intelligent character’s anus being safe for six-year-olds  
That’s a Third Degree Felony charge of Indecency With A Child in Texas. Doesn’t sound safe to me.
 
@Frustration in Excelsis  
I’d say make a school of fish tag and get crackin’ adding it to images.

@Frustration in Excelsis  
Shoal, perhaps?

@Frustration in Excelsis  
@TexasUberAlles
 
Right. If no one has any further comments, I’m going to go ahead and create the school of fish tag.

What’s the purpose of the season 8 tag? It implies spoiler:season08. What does it do that spoiler:season08 doesn’t? If it’s used on a screencap from a particular episode, should it be removed like spoiler:season08 should?
 
While I’m here, there’s still a lot of pictures of the new crew being tagged spoiler:season08. We’re still replacing that with school daze, right?